Loading...
2024 06 25 PC4 ow (ra CEM ofAw 0FSFRT — Planning Commission agendas and staff reports are now available on the City's web page: wwwJaquintaca.gov PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 2024, AT 5:00 P.M. TO BE HELD AT: CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta AND 2100 Costa Del Mar, Unit 17, Carlsbad, California, 92009 Members of the public may listen to this meeting by tuning -in live via http://Iaguinta.12milesout.com/video/live. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Commissioners: Caldwell, Guerrero, Hassett, Hernandez, McCune, Tyerman and Chair Nieto PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on any matter not listed on the agenda pursuant to the "Public Comments — Instructions" listed at the end of the agenda. The 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 — None BUSINESS SESSION — None STUDY SESSION — None PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 1 of 5 JUNE 25, 2024 PUBLIC HEARINGS — 5:00 p.m. or thereafter For all Public Hearings on the agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Commission Secretary prior to consideration of that item; comments are limited to three (3) minutes (approximately 350 words). Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing and/or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project(s) at the time of the public hearing. 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. PAGE CONTINUED FROM MAY 28, 2024: CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017- 0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 FOR THE TRAVERTINE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 1,200 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 45,000 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL WITH 100 VILLAS, SPA AND WELLNESS CENTER AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL USES; CEQA: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT; LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, WEST OF MADISON STREET, AND NORTH OF AVENUE 64 STAFF ITEMS QUARTERLY PROJECT UPDATE COMMISSIONERS' ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission will be held on July 9, 2024, commencing at 5:00 p.m. at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Tania Flores, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the Commission meeting of June 25, 2024, was posted on the City's website, near the entrance to the Council Chamber at 78495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at 51321 Avenida Bermudas, on June 20, 2024; additionally, the foregoing Agenda will be posted on June 21, 2024 at 2100 Costa Del Mar, Unit 17, Carlsbad, California, 92009 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 2 of 5 JUNE 25, 2024 DATED: June 20, 2024 Tania Flores, Commission Secretary City of La Quinta, California Public Notices Agenda packet materials are available for public inspection: 1) at the Clerk's Office at La Quinta City Hall, located at 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253; and 2) on the City's website at https://www.laguintaca.gov/business/boards-and- commissions/planning-commission, in accordance with the Brown Act [Government Code § 54957.5; AB 2647 (Stats. 2022, Ch. 971)]. • The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please contact Commission Secretary at (760) 777-7023, 24-hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If background material is to be presented to the Commission during a Commission meeting, please be advised that 10 copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Commission Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this takes place prior to the beginning of the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS — INSTRUCTIONS Members of the public may address the Commission on any matter listed or not listed on the agenda as follows: WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS can be provided either in -person during the meeting by submitting 10 copies to the Commission Secretary, it is requested that this takes place prior to the beginning of the meeting; or can be emailed in advance to TFlores .LaQuintaCA.gov, no later than 12:00 p.m., on the day of the meeting. Written public comments will be distributed to the Commission, made public, and will be incorporated into the public record of the meeting, but will not be read during the meeting unless, upon the request of the Chair, a brief summary of public comments is asked to be reported. If written public comments are emailed, the email subject line must clearly state "Written Comments" and should include: 1) full name, 2) city of residence, and 3) subject matter. VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENTS can be provided in -person during the meeting by completing a "Request to Speak" form and submitting it to the Commission Secretary; it is requested that this takes place prior to the beginning of the meeting. Please limit your PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 3 of 5 JUNE 25, 2024 comments to three (3) minutes (or approximately 350 words). Members of the public shall be called upon to speak by the Chair. In accordance with City Council Resolution No. 2022-028, a one-time additional speaker time donation of three (3) minutes per individual is permitted; please note that the member of the public donating time must: 1) submit this in writing to the Commission Secretary by completing a "Request to Speak" form noting the name of the person to whom time is being donated to, and 2) be present at the time the speaker provides verbal comments. Verbal public comments are defined as comments provided in the speakers' own voice and may not include video or sound recordings of the speaker or of other individuals or entities, unless permitted by the Chair. Public speakers may elect to use printed presentation materials to aid their comments; 10 copies of such printed materials shall be provided to the Commission Secretary to be disseminated to the Commission, made public, and incorporated into the public record of the meeting; it is requested that the printed materials are provided prior to the beginning of the meeting. There shall be no use of Chamber resources and technology to display visual or audible presentations during public comments, unless permitted by the Chair. All writings or documents, including but not limited to emails and attachments to emails, submitted to the City regarding any item(s) listed or not listed on this agenda are public records. All information in such writings and documents is subject to disclosure as being in the public domain and subject to search and review by electronic means, including but not limited to the City's Internet Web site and any other Internet Web -based platform or other Web -based form of communication. All information in such writings and documents similarly is subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act [Government Code § 7920.000 et seq.]. TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY — INSTRUCTIONS Teleconference accessibility may be triggered in accordance with AB 2449 (Stats. 2022, Ch. 285), codified in the Brown Act [Government Code § 549531, if a member of the Commission requests to attend and participate in this meeting remotely due to `just cause" or "emergency circumstances, " as defined, and only if the request is approved. In such instances, remote public accessibility and participation will be facilitated via Zoom Webinar as detailed at the end of this Agenda. *** TELECONFERENCE PROCEDURES — PURSUANT TO AB 2449*** APPLICABLE ONLY WHEN TELECONFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY IS IN EFFECT Verbal public comments via Teleconference — members of the public may attend and participate in this meeting by teleconference via Zoom and use the "raise your hand" feature when public comments are prompted by the Chair; the City will facilitate the ability for a member of the public to be audible to the Commission and general public and allow him/her/they to speak on the item(s) requested. Please note — members of the PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 4 of 5 JUNE 25, 2024 public must unmute themselves when prompted upon being recognized by the Chair, in order to become audible to the Commission and the public. Only one person at a time may speak by teleconference and only after being recognized by the Chair. ZOOM LINK: https://us06web.zoom.us/m/82853067939 Meeting ID: 828 5306 7939 Or join by phone: (253) 215 — 8782 Written public comments — can be provided in person during the meeting or emailed to TFlores LaQuintaCA.gov any time prior to the adjournment of the meeting, and will be distributed to the Commission, made public, incorporated into the public record of the meeting, and will not be read during the meeting unless, upon the request of the Chair, a brief summary of any public comment is asked to be read, to the extent the Committee can accommodate such request. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page 5 of 5 JUNE 25, 2024 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 City of La Quinta PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: June 25, 2024 STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: CONTINUED FROM MAY 28, 2024: CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 FOR THE TRAVERTINE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 1,200 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 45,000 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL WITH 100 VILLAS, SPA AND WELLNESS CENTER AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL USES; CEQA: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT; LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, WEST OF MADISON STREET, AND NORTH OF AVENUE 64 RECOMMENDATION Consider a Resolution to recommend City Council certify an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) for the Travertine Project and direct staff to prepare Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Consider a Resolution to recommend City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2017-0002, Zone Change 2017-0002, Specific Plan 2017-0004, Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387), and Development Agreement 2021-0001. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The Travertine property is located in the southeastern portion of the City, south of Avenue 60, north of Avenue 64 and west of Madison Street. The proposed project includes development of a mix of uses including up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types; two community parks; a 38.3-acre resort/spa facility with a boutique hotel with a restaurant and 100 villas, spa and wellness center, yoga and tennis courts; a 46.2-acre resort/golf facility with a golf academy, clubhouse, and banquet restaurant; a public trail system with staging areas and approximately 301 acres of natural open space. The Planning Commission initially reviewed this proposal on May 28, 2024, where the applicant requested to continue the public hearing in order to address the Commission's concerns regarding noise, traffic, and aesthetics related to the proposed Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4. M. 3ACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Applications for the Travertine project were presented to the Planning Commission on May 28, 2024. These consist of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement to facilitate changes to the existing Travertine Specific Plan. The staff report for the May 28 hearing is accessible via the following weblink: https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/50069/638521686551770000 Public comment was received at the meeting which focused on impacts from the extension of Avenue 62 as an elevated roadway over Dike #4, including potential aesthetic, noise, and traffic impacts. After commission discussion, the applicant requested a continuance to the June 25 meeting in order to more fully address these concerns. The applicant has provided information regarding the concerns raised at the meeting (Attachment 1). After the May 28 meeting, public comments were received and are included in Attachment 2. CEQA PROCESS Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) are used to evaluate potential environmental impacts of projects. There are two parts to an EIR, a Draft EIR and a Final EIR. The Draft EIR contains the environmental analysis for various topics as listed in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist, including but not limited to air quality, noise, traffic, and biological topics, among others. The Draft EIR also lays out the mitigation measures that are required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The draft is circulated for 45 days for public review. The City, as lead agency, collects comments received during this period and prepares responses to the comments that are incorporated into the Final EIR. The Final EIR includes the comment letters received, the responses, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and any errata or minor changes that clarify language in the Draft EIR. The Final EIR is made available to the public and sent to commenters at least 10 days prior to the certification of the EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.) The Final EIR is reviewed by the decision making body of the lead agency, in this case, the City Council, prior to approving the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15090). Once the EIR is certified by the City Council, it is considered approved. For this project, the Draft EIR steps have been completed and the Final EIR is currently being prepared and reviewed by Staff. The Commission is not certifying the EIR for the project in this hearing but is only making a recommendation to the City Council, the decision making body, for them to certify the EIR. The City is legally compliant with CEQA. Prepared by: Cheri Flores, Planning Manager Approved by: Danny Castro, Design and Development Director Attachments: 1. 06-13-2024 Technical Memo 2. Public Comments 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2018011023) FOR THE TRAVERTINE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 1,200 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 45,000 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL WITH 100 VILLAS, SPA AND WELLNESS CENTER AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL USES FACILITY LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, AND WEST OF MADISON STREET CASE NUMBER: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE APPLICANT: TRG LAND WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on May 28, 2024, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by TRG Land for approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, and Development Agreement for a master planned community on approximately 855 acres located south of Avenue 60, north of Avenue 64, and west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: APNs 766-110-003, -004, -007, and -009; 766-120-0015 -002, -003, -006, -015, -016, -018, -021, and -023; 753-040-0145 016, and -017; 753-050-007, and -029; 753-060-003; 764- 280-057, -059, and -061 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did consider Environmental Assessment 2017-0008 and its Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH #2018011023), as mandated by State law; and WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 2024, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the site, and emailed or mailed to all interested parties who have requested notification relating to the project; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an EIR for the Travertine Project in October 2023 (SCH #2018011023) and published a Notice of Availability on October 27, 2023, for said EIR and included a public review period from October 27 to December 11, 2023; and 1.1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, the EIR found that although most environmental impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels, impacts to air quality emissions, greenhouse gas emissions and transportation will remain significant and unavoidable; and 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 findings to recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 2017-0008: 1. That Environmental Assessment 2017-0008 has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. 2. The Project has the potential to significantly impact air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and transportation. 3. Impacts of the Project on all other environmental issue areas can be mitigated to less than significant levels with incorporation of the mitigation measures contained in the EIR and its Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 4. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning Commission in this case. SECTION 2. That it does hereby recommend the City Council certify the EIR for the Travertine Project (EA2017-0008 SCH #2018011023), and find that General Plan Amendment 2017-0002, Zone Change 2017-0002, Specific Plan 2017-0004, Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 and Development Agreement 2021-0001 are consistent with the analysis therein and adopt Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. SECTION 3. That it hereby directs staff to prepare, for the City Council's consideration, Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on May 28, 2024, by the following vote: p PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: Page 3 of 3 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEPHEN T. NIETO, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DANNY CASTRO, Design and Development Director City of La Quinta, California 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT A TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRAFT EIR SCH# 2018011023 LEAD AGENCY: GEM of dw DESERT T The City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 APPLICANT: Hofmann Land Development Co. 3000 Oak Road, Suite 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 PREPARER: MSA Consulting Inc. 34200 Bob Hope Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 it October 2023 Page intentionally blank 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS Draft EIR Chapters Chapter 1.0 Executive Summary....................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview of the Executive Summary..................................................................1-1 1.2 Summary of the Proposed Action.......................................................................1-1 1.3 Summary of Project Impacts..............................................................................1-5 1.4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project..................................................................1-6 1.5 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved.......................................................1-7 Chapter2.0 Introduction................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Purpose..............................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Review of the Draft EIR.......................................................................................2-2 2.3 Scope of the EIR..................................................................................................2-4 2.4 Organization of the EIR.......................................................................................2-6 2.5 Reference Documents........................................................................................2-9 Chapter 3.0 Project Description........................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Project Location..................................................................................................3-1 3.3 Project History....................................................................................................3-8 3.4 Overview of the Proposed Project.................................................................... 3-14 3.5 Project Design Features....................................................................................3-30 3.6 Project Planning Areas......................................................................................3-32 3.7 Project Construction.........................................................................................3-38 3.8 Circulation........................................................................................................3-42 3.9 Infrastructure Plan............................................................................................3-46 3.10 Project Implementation....................................................................................3-63 3.11 Intended Uses of This EIR.................................................................................3-63 3.12 Responsible Agencies.......................................................................................3-63 Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis...................................................................... 4-1 4.0 Introduction........................................................................................................4-1 4.0.1 Resource Categories Addressed in the EIR.........................................................4-1 4.0.2 Format of the EIR................................................................................................4-1 Chapter 4.0 Sections 4.1 Aesthetics........................................................................................................4.1-1 4.1.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.1-1 4.1.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.1-1 4.1.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.1-6 4.1.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.1-11 4.1.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.1-56 4.1.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.1-57 Travertine Draft EIR i October 2023 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.1.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.1-58 4.1.8 References............................................................................................4.1-58 4.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources................................................................4.2-1 4.2.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.2-1 4.2.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.2-1 4.2.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.2-3 4.2.4 Project Impact Analysis...........................................................................4.2-6 4.2.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.2-20 4.2.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.2-21 4.2.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.2-21 4.2.8 References............................................................................................4.2-21 4.3 Air Quality........................................................................................................4.3-1 4.3.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.3-1 4.3.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.3-1 4.3.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.3-2 4.3.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.3-13 4.3.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.3-34 4.3.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.3-36 4.3.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.3-37 4.3.8 References............................................................................................4.3-37 4.4 Biological Resources........................................................................................4.4-1 4.4.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.4-1 4.4.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.4-1 4.4.3 Regulatory Setting................................................................................4.4-21 4.4.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.4-29 4.4.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.4-46 4.4.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.4-47 4.4.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.4-55 4.4.8 References............................................................................................4.4-55 4.5 Cultural Resources...........................................................................................4.5-1 4.5.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.5-1 4.5.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.5-1 4.5.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.5-5 4.5.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.5-10 4.5.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.5-18 4.5.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.5-19 4.5.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.5-22 4.5.8 References............................................................................................4.5-22 Travertine Draft EIR October 2023 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.6 Energy Resources.......................................................................................................4.6-1 4.6.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.6-1 4.6.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.6-1 4.6.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.6-1 4.6.4 Project Impact Analysis...........................................................................4.6-9 4.6.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.6-21 4.6.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.6-24 4.6.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.6-24 4.6.8 References............................................................................................4.6-24 4.7 Geology and Soils............................................................................................4.7-1 4.7.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.7-1 4.7.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.7-1 4.7.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.7-9 4.7.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.7-11 4.7.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.7-24 4.7.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.7-24 4.7.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.7-26 4.7.8 References............................................................................................4.7-26 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions..............................................................................4.8-1 4.8.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.8-1 4.8.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.8-2 4.8.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.8-2 4.8.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.8-11 4.8.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.8-31 4.8.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.8-32 4.8.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.8-33 4.8.8 References............................................................................................4.8-33 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials...................................................................4.9-1 4.9.1 Introduction............................................................................................4.9-1 4.9.2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................4.9-1 4.9.3 Regulatory Setting..................................................................................4.9-3 4.9.4 Project Impact Analysis.........................................................................4.9-12 4.9.5 Cumulative Impacts..............................................................................4.9-27 4.9.6 Mitigation Measures.............................................................................4.9-29 4.9.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation....................................................4.9-30 4.9.8 References............................................................................................4.9-31 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality........................................................................4.10-1 4.1.1 Introduction..........................................................................................4.10-1 Travertine Draft EIR iii October 2023 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.1.2 Existing Conditions................................................................................4.10-1 4.1.3 Regulatory Setting................................................................................4.10-9 4.1.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.10-15 4.1.5 Cumulative Impacts............................................................................4.10-35 4.1.6 Mitigation Measures...........................................................................4.10-36 4.1.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation..................................................4.10-36 4.1.8 References..........................................................................................4.10-36 4.11 Land Use and Planning..................................................................................4.11-1 4.11.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.11-1 4.11.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.11-1 4.11.3 Regulatory Setting............................................................................4.11-14 4.11.4 Project Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.11-20 4.11.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.11-31 4.11.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.11-32 4.11.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.11-32 4.11.8 References........................................................................................4.11-32 4.12 Noise.............................................................................................................4.12-1 4.12.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.12-1 4.12.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.12-1 4.12.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.12-3 4.12.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.12-6 4.12.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.12-31 4.12.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.12-34 4.12.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.12-34 4.12.8 References........................................................................................4.12-35 4.13 Population and Housing................................................................................4.13-1 4.13.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.13-1 4.13.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.13-1 4.13.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.13-4 4.13.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.13-9 4.13.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.13-14 4.13.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.13-14 4.13.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.13-14 4.13.8 References........................................................................................4.13-14 4.14 Public Services...............................................................................................4.14-1 4.14.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.14-1 4.14.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.14-1 4.14.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.14-8 Travertine Draft EIR iv October 2023 16 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.14.4 Project Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.14-10 4.14.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.14-18 4.14.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.14-19 4.14.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.14-22 4.14.8 References........................................................................................4.14-22 4.15 Recreation.....................................................................................................4.15-1 4.15.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.15-1 4.15.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.15-1 4.15.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.15-3 4.15.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.15-5 4.15.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.15-11 4.15.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.15-11 4.15.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.15-11 4.15.8 References........................................................................................4.15-11 4.16 Transportation...............................................................................................4.16-1 4.16.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.16-1 4.16.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.16-1 4.16.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.16-7 4.16.4 Project Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.16-10 4.16.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.16-44 4.16.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.16-53 4.16.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.16-59 4.16.8 References........................................................................................4.16-60 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources...............................................................................4.17-1 4.17.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.17-1 4.17.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.17-1 4.17.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.17-3 4.17.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.17-5 4.17.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.17-13 4.17.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.17-14 4.17.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.17-17 4.17.8 References........................................................................................4.17-17 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems.........................................................................4.18-1 4.18.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 4.18-1 4.18.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.18-1 4.18.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.18-6 4.18.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.18-9 4.18.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.18-26 Travertine Draft EIR v October 2023 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.18.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.18-28 4.18.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.18-28 4.18.8 References........................................................................................4.18-29 4.19 Wildfire..........................................................................................................4.19-1 4.19.1 Introduction........................................................................................4.19-1 4.19.2 Existing Conditions..............................................................................4.19-1 4.19.3 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................4.19-6 4.19.4 Project Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.19-9 4.19.5 Cumulative Impacts..........................................................................4.19-25 4.19.6 Mitigation Measures.........................................................................4.19-26 4.19.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation................................................4.19-26 4.19.8 References........................................................................................4.19-26 Chapter 5.0 Other CEQA Sections...................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Purpose..............................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts..................................................................5-1 5.3 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes.................................................5-4 5.4 Growth -Inducing Impacts...................................................................................5-8 Chapter 6.0 Effects Found to have No Impact................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Mineral Resources..............................................................................................6-1 Chapter7.0 Alternatives................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................7-1 7.2 Alternatives Considered and Rejected................................................................7-2 7.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project..................................................................7-4 7.3.1 Alternative 1— No Project / No Build................................................................7-10 7.3.2 Alternative 2 — No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan .........................7-15 7.3.3 Alternative 3 — Phase 1 (A and B) Only.............................................................7-28 7.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative..............................................................7-41 Chapter8.0 References..................................................................................................... 8-1 Chapter9.0 Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................... 9-1 Travertine Draft EIR vi October 2023 18 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables Chapter 1.0 Table 1-1 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan.................................................1-2 Table 1-2 Travertine Land Use Plan Summary....................................................................1-2 Table 1-3 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..........................1-9 Chapter 3.0 Table 3-1 Surrounding Land Uses.......................................................................................3-7 Table 3-2 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan...............................................3-21 Table 3-3 Approved and Proposed Specific Plan Elements...............................................3-22 Table 3-4 Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Land Use Plan Summary ........................3-23 Table 3-5 Proposed Uses and Amenities for Resort Planning Areas.................................3-34 Table 3-6 Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Construction Phasing Plan .....................3-40 Chapter 4.0 Section 4.2 — Agricultural and Forestry Resources Table 4.2-1 California LESA Modeling Scoring Thresholds..................................................4.2-8 Table 4.2-2 Soil Suitability— Map Symbol Mapping Unit Capability...................................4.2-9 Table 4.2-3 Land Capability Classification (LCC) and Storie Index Score...........................4.2-11 Table 4.2-4 Project Size Score..........................................................................................4.2-12 Table 4.2-5 Water Resource Availability...........................................................................4.2-13 Table 4.2-6 Surrounding Agricultural and Protected Lands..............................................4.2-13 Table 4.2-7 Final LESA Score Sheet Summary...................................................................4.2-15 Table 4.2-8 Off -Site FMMP Categories.............................................................................4.2-17 Section 4.3 —Air Quality Table 4.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status...................................4.3-8 Table 4.3-2 SCAQMD's Air Quality Significance Thresholds..............................................4.3-15 Table 4.3-3 Construction Duration...................................................................................4.3-21 Table 4.3-4 Construction Equipment Assumptions..........................................................4.3-22 Table 4.3-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Unmitigated)..............................4.3-23 Table 4.3-6 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Mitigated)..................................4.3-24 Table 4.3-7 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (Unmitigated)...............................4.3-26 Table 4.2-8 Localized Construction Emissions Summary (Unmitigated)...........................4.3-33 Section 4.4 — Biological Resources Table 4.4-1 Summary of Vegetation/Land Use Types.........................................................4.4-3 Table 4.4-2 Summary of Aquatic Resources and Delineation Limits within Project Site ... 4.4-16 Table 4.4-3 Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types and Impacts ..............4.4-39 Table 4.4-4 Jurisdictional Impact......................................................................................4.4-41 Travertine Draft EIR vii October 2023 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 4.5 — Cultural Resources Table 4.5-1 Cultural Resources.........................................................................................4.5-15 Section 4.6 — Energy Resources Table 4.6-1 Project Electricity Demand............................................................................4.6-15 Section 4.7 — Geology and Soils Table 4.7-1 Paleontological Potential of Geologic Units Underlying the Project..............4.7-23 Section 4.8 — Greenhouse Gas Emissions Table 4.8-1 Construction Duration...................................................................................4.8-14 Table 4.8-2 Amortized Annual Construction Emissions....................................................4.8-14 Table 4.8-3 Project GHG Emissions Summary Amortized Construction and Annual Operation Emissions in 2031..........................................................................................4.8-16 Table 4.8-4 Project GHG Emissions Summary Amortized Construction and Annual Operation Emissions in 2045 With Mitigation................................................................4.8-17 Table 4.8-5 City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures for New Development ...................................................................................................................... 4.8-19 Table 4.8-6 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary..............................................................4.8-26 Section 4.11 — Land Use and Planning Table 4.11-1 Surrounding Land Uses..................................................................................4.11-2 Table 4.11-2 Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations...............................................4.11-7 Table 4.11-3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations................................................4.11-11 Table 4.11-4 Land Use Summary......................................................................................4.11-21 Table 4.11-5 PA 1 Indoor Area.........................................................................................4.11-24 Table 4.11-6 PA 11 Indoor Area.......................................................................................4.11-24 Section 4.12 — Noise Table 4.12-1 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments ........................4.12-4 Table 4.12-2 Construction Hours........................................................................................4.12-5 Table 4.12-3 Exterior Noise Standards...............................................................................4.12-6 Table 4.12-4 Typical Noise Levels.......................................................................................4.12-7 Table 4.12-5 Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receivers...........................4.12-9 Table 4.12-6 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment..................................4.12-10 Table 4.12-7 Significance Criteria Summary.....................................................................4.12-11 Table 4.12-8 24-Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements.............................................4.12-12 Table 4.12-9 Off -Site Roadway Parameters......................................................................4.12-16 Table 4.12-10 Average Daily Traffic Volumes.....................................................................4.12-16 Table 4.12-11 Time of Day Vehicle Splits............................................................................4.12-17 Table 4.12-12 Distribution of Traffic Flow by Vehicle Type (Vehicle Mix)..........................4.12-17 Table 4.12-13 On -Site Roadway Parameters......................................................................4.12-17 Table 4.12-14 Off -Site Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary..............................4.12-19 Travertine Draft EIR viii October 2023 rW TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 4.12-15 Rock Crushing Reference Noise Level..........................................................4.12-19 Table 4.12-16 Rock Crushing Noise Level Summary...........................................................4.12-20 Table 4.12-17 Off -Site Construction -Related Temporary Noise Level Increases ................4.12-20 Table 4.12-18 Existing Noise Contours...............................................................................4.12-22 Table 4.12-19 2031 Roadway Noise Contours Without Project.........................................4.12-23 Table 4.12-20 2031 Roadway Noise Contours With Project...............................................4.12-23 Table 4.12-21 2031 Traffic Noise Level Increases...............................................................4.12-24 Table 4.12-22 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels........................................................................4.12-27 Table 4.12-23 Interior Noise Levels (CNEL)........................................................................4.12-28 Table 4.12-24 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels...................................................4.12-30 Table 4.12-25 Noise Level Without Project 2031, With Project 2031, and Year 2040 Conditions ................................................................................................................. 4.12-32 Section 4.13 - Population and Housing Table 4.13-1 Riverside County Population and Dwelling Units...........................................4.13-1 Table 4.13-2 Total Households, 2010 to 2018....................................................................4.13-2 Table 4.13-3 Total Dwelling Units by Type of Structure, 2012 to 2019..............................4.13-3 Table 4.13-4 Housing Tenure and Vacancy (2018).............................................................4.13-3 Table 4.13-5 SCAG Regional Growth Forecast....................................................................4.13-5 Table 4.13-6 SCAG Riverside County Growth Forecast.......................................................4.13-5 Table 4.13-7 SCAG La Quinta Growth Forecast..................................................................4.13-5 Table 4.13-8 Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2022-2029.........................................4.13-6 Table 4.13-9 Regional and Local Population Growth Trends, 2000-2016...........................4.13-7 Section 4.14 - Public Services Table 4.14-1 La Quinta Fire Station Locations....................................................................4.14-2 Table 4.14-2 La Quinta Police Station Locations.................................................................4.14-3 Table 4.14-3 CVUSD Schools Serving La Quinta..................................................................4.14-4 Table 4.14-4 Existing CVUSD School Capacity(2019/2020)................................................4.14-4 Table 4.14-5 Existing CVUSD School Capacity(2021/2022)................................................4.14-5 Table 4.14-6 Parks within the City of La Quinta.................................................................4.14-6 Table 4.14-7 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta.......................................................4.14-7 Table 4.14-8 Public Facilities within the City of La Quinta..................................................4.14-7 Table 4.14-9 CVUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate...........................................4.14-11 Table 4.14-10 DSUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate...........................................4.14-12 Table 4.14-11 CVUSD and DSUSD Generation Rates..........................................................4.14-16 Section 4.15 - Recreation Table 4.15-1 Parks within the City of La Quinta.................................................................4.15-2 Table 4.15-2 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta.......................................................4.15-3 Table 4.15-3 Private and Public Recreational Facilities......................................................4.15-6 Travertine Draft EIR ix October 2023 21 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 4.16 — Transportation Table 4.16-1 Intersection Analysis for Existing (2019) Intersection Operations (With Seasonal Factor Adjustment)........................................................................................4.16-3 Table 4.16-2 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing (2019) Conditions (With Seasonal Factor Adjustment)........................................................................................4.16-4 Table 4.13-3 Roadway Segment Level of Service Description Mid -Link and Uninterrupted Flow .................................................................................................................... 4.16-13 Table 4.16-4 Intersection Level of Service Thresholds.....................................................4.16-14 Table 4.16-5 Intersection Analysis Locations....................................................................4.16-15 Table 4.16-6 Roadway Segment Analysis Locations.........................................................4.16-16 Table 4.16-7 Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS..............................................4.16-16 Table 4.16-8 Required Intersection Levels of Service.......................................................4.16-17 Table 4.16-9 Impact Criteria for Intersections Already Operating at LOS E or LOS F........ 4.16-17 Table 4.16-10 Project Phase 1 (2026) Trip Generation Summary.......................................4.16-19 Table 4.16-11 Project Phase 2 (2029) Trip Generation Summary.......................................4.16-20 Table 4.16-12 Project Phase 3 (2031) Trip Generation Summary.......................................4.16-21 Table 4.16-13 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Project (E+P) Conditions (Assumes Project Buildout)......................................................................................................4.16-22 Table 4.16-14 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for E+P Conditions..............................4.16-24 Table 4.16-15 Intersection Analysis for Project Buildout (2031) Conditions (with 2031 Cumulative Traffic).........................................................................................................4.16-26 Table 4.16-16 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative Plus Project Buildout (2031) Conditions (with 2031 Cumulative Traffic) ............4.16-28 Table 4.16-17 Service Population and Employment Estimates..........................................4.16-37 Table 4.16-18 Baseline and Cumulative Project Residential Home -Based VMT.................4.16-38 Table 4.16-19 Citywide Home -Based VMT..........................................................................4.16-38 Table 4.16-20 Base Year Sub -Regional Link -Level VMT......................................................4.16-40 Table 4.16-21 Intersection Analysis for 2040 Conditions with Madison Street Extension Conditions...................................................................................................4.16-46 Table 4.16-22 Roadway Segment Volume/Capacity Analysis for 2040 Conditions with Madison Street Extension Conditions........................................................................4.16-47 Table 4.16-23 Intersection Analysis for 2040 Conditions without Madison Street Extension Conditions...................................................................................................4.16-49 Table 4.16-24 Roadway Segment Volume/Capacity Analysis for 2040 Conditions without Madison Street Extension Conditions..........................................................4.16-50 Table 4.16-25 Cumulative Development Trip Generation Summary..................................4.16-51 Table 4.16-26 Summary of 2040 Intersection Improvements............................................4.16-56 Section 4.17— Tribal Cultural Resources Travertine Draft EIR x October 2023 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 4.17-1 Tribal Consultation 2020.............................................................................4.17-12 Section 4.18 — Utilities and Service Systems Table 4.18-1 Project Area and Water Usage....................................................................4.18-22 Table 4.18-2 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply....................................4.18-23 Table 4.18-3 Annual Solid Waste Generation...................................................................4.18-25 Section 4.19 — Wildfire Table 4.19-1 Non -Flood Event Evacuation Route Response Times...................................4.19-12 Table 4.19-2 Assumed Number of Cars............................................................................4.19-13 Table 4.19-3 Evacuation Route Capacity..........................................................................4.19-13 Table 4.19-4 Non -Flood Event Evacuation Times.............................................................4.19-13 Chapter 7.0 Table 7-1 Approved and Proposed Specific Plan Land Use Plan.........................................7-4 Table 7-2 Phase 1 (1A and 113) Only Alternative Land Use and Acreages ...........................7-6 Table 7-3 1995 Specific Plan Development Standards.....................................................7-16 Table 7-5 Comparison of Alternatives and Project...........................................................7-42 List of Exhibits Chapter 3.0 Exhibit 3-1 Regional Location...............................................................................................3-3 Exhibit 3-2 Vicinity Map........................................................................................................3-4 Exhibit 3-3 Site Location Map...............................................................................................3-5 Exhibit 3-4 Topography and Slope........................................................................................3-6 Exhibit3-5 1995 Land Use..................................................................................................3-10 Exhibit 3-6 Conservation Area............................................................................................3-13 Exhibit 3-7 Conceptual Land Use Plan................................................................................3-17 Exhibit 3-8 Existing General Plan........................................................................................3-18 Exhibit 3-9 Proposed General Plan.....................................................................................3-19 Exhibit 3-10 Existing Zoning..................................................................................................3-26 Exhibit 3-11 Proposed Zoning...............................................................................................3-27 Exhibit 3-12 Recreation Plan................................................................................................3-37 Exhibit 3-13 Conceptual Construction Phasing.....................................................................3-41 Exhibit 3-14 Circulation Plan.................................................................................................3-44 Exhibit 3-15 Phase 1 Interim EVA Access..............................................................................3-45 Exhibit 3-16 Phase 1 Interim Conceptual Water Plan...........................................................3-50 Exhibit 3-17 Conceptual Water Plan.....................................................................................3-51 Exhibit 3-18 Conceptual Sewer Plan.....................................................................................3-52 Exhibit 3-19 Existing Hydrology............................................................................................3-56 Travertine Draft EIR xi October 2023 23 TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit 3-20 Conceptual Grading Plan..................................................................................3-57 Exhibit 3-21 Slope Ratio Diagram.........................................................................................3-58 Exhibit 3-22 Drainage Master Plan — Conceptual Hydrology................................................3-59 Exhibit 3-23 Flood Protection Plan.......................................................................................3-60 Exhibit 3-24 Flood Conveyance West and South Edges........................................................3-61 Exhibit 3-25 On -Site Drainage Plan and Cross-Section.........................................................3-62 Chapter 4.0 Chapter 4.1 —Aesthetics Exhibit 4.1-1 Existing Conditions from Local Roads..............................................................4.1-4 Exhibit 4.1-2 Water Tank Examples....................................................................................4.1-15 Exhibit 4.1-3 Proposed Water Tank Locations....................................................................4.1-16 Exhibit 4.1-4 Programmatic Off -Site Infrastructure Map....................................................4.1-19 Exhibit 4.1-5 Typical Water Well Example..........................................................................4.1-20 Exhibit 4.1-6 Typical Substation Example...........................................................................4.1-21 Exhibit 4.1-7 Key Map Locations........................................................................................4.1-24 Exhibit4.1-8 Location 1......................................................................................................4.1-26 Exhibit 4.1-9 Location 2......................................................................................................4.1-27 Exhibit 4.1-10 Location 3......................................................................................................4.1-29 Exhibit 4.1-11 Location 4......................................................................................................4.1-30 Exhibit 4.1-12 Location 5......................................................................................................4.1-32 Exhibit 4.1-13 Location 6......................................................................................................4.1-33 Exhibit4.1-14 Location 7......................................................................................................4.1-34 Exhibit 4.1-15 Location 8......................................................................................................4.1-36 Exhibit 4.1-16 Location 9......................................................................................................4.1-37 Exhibit 4.1-17 Location 10....................................................................................................4.1-39 Exhibit 4.1-18 Location 11....................................................................................................4.1-40 Exhibit 4.1-19 Location 12....................................................................................................4.1-41 Exhibit 4.1-20 Overall Wall Plan........................................................................................... 4.1-51 Section 4.2 — Agricultural and Forestry Resources Exhibit 4.2-1 Project Farmland Importance..........................................................................4.2-2 Exhibit 4.2-2 Project Soils Type..........................................................................................4.2-10 Exhibit 4.2-3 Surrounding Agricultural and Protected Lands..............................................4.2-14 Exhibit 4.2-4 Off -Site Utility Field Land Use Categories......................................................4.2-16 Exhibit 4.2-5 Williamson Act Contracted Lands..................................................................4.2-19 Section 4.3 —Air Quality Exhibit 4.3-1 Sensitive Receptor Locations.........................................................................4.3-31 Section 4.4 — Biological Resources Travertine Draft EIR xii October 2023 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit4.4-1 USDA Soils.......................................................................................................4.4-9 Exhibit 4.4-2 CVMSHCP Conservation Area........................................................................4.4-14 Exhibit 4.4-3 Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Critical Habitat.....................................................4.4-15 Exhibit 4.4-4 Drainage Areas A-E........................................................................................4.4-19 Exhibit 4.4-5 Jurisdictional Impact Map..............................................................................4.4-42 Section 4.5 — Cultural Resources Exhibit 4.5-1 Project Area of Potential Effect.....................................................................4.5-14 Section 4.9 — Hazards and Hazardous Materials Exhibit 4.9-1 Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map......................................................................4.9-27 Section 4.10 — Hydrology and Water Quality Exhibit 4.10-1 Flood Protection Plan....................................................................................4.10-7 Exhibit 4.10-2 Proposed Onsite Hydrology Conditions.......................................................4.10-19 Section 4.11 — Land Use and Planning Exhibit 4.11-1 Ownership Map.............................................................................................4.11-3 Exhibit 4.11-1 Existing General Plan.....................................................................................4.11-8 Exhibit 4.11-3 Proposed General Plan..................................................................................4.11-9 Exhibit 4.11-4 Existing Zoning.............................................................................................4.11-12 Exhibit 4.11-5 Proposed Zoning..........................................................................................4.11-13 Exhibit 4.11-6 Planning Area Map......................................................................................4.11-22 Exhibit 4.11-7 Conceptual Wall Plan...................................................................................4.11-29 Section 4.12 — Noise Exhibit 4.12-1 Noise Measurement Locations......................................................................4.12-2 Exhibit 4.12-1 Noise Source and Receiver Locations..........................................................4.12-14 Section 4.15 — Recreation Exhibit 4.15-1 Recreation Plan.............................................................................................4.15-8 Section 4.16 — Transportation Exhibit 4.16-1 TIA Study Area...............................................................................................4.16-6 Exhibit 4.16-2 Phase 3 (2031) Site Development Plan........................................................4.16-29 Exhibit 4.16-3 Phase 3 (2031) Recommended Access Features & Contributions to Off -Site Improvements.............................................................................................4.16-30 Exhibit 4.16-4 Recommended On -Site Road Improvements..............................................4.16-33 Exhibit 4.16-1 Recommended On -Site Lane Improvements...............................................4.16-34 Section 4.18 — Utilities and Service Systems Exhibit 4.18-1 Conceptual Water Plan................................................................................4.18-14 Exhibit 4.18-2 Conceptual Sewer Plan................................................................................4.18-16 Section 4.19 — Wildfire Exhibit 4.19-1 Fire Hazard Severity Zone..............................................................................4.19-4 Exhibit 4.19-2 Fire Hazard Severity Zone - Project................................................................4.19-5 Travertine Draft EIR xiii October 2023 25 TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit 4.19-3 Circulation Plan (Phase 1)............................................................................4.19-15 Exhibit 4.19-4 Evacuation Route Plan (Phase 1).................................................................4.19-16 Exhibit4.19-5 Evacuation Route Plan(Buildout)................................................................4.19-17 Exhibit 4.19-6 Proposed Edge Conditions...........................................................................4.19-22 Chapter 7.0 Exhibit 7-1 1995 Travertine Specific Plan.............................................................................7-5 Exhibit 7-2 Phase 1A Construction.......................................................................................7-7 Exhibit 7-3 Phase 113 Construction........................................................................................7-8 Travertine Draft EIR xiv October 2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Appendices Appendix A Notice of Preparation, Comments Received and SPA Appendix B.1 Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Appendix B.2 Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Updated Appendix C.1 Air Quality Impact Analysis Appendix C.2 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum Appendix D.1 Biological Resources Assessment Appendix D.2 Utility Field Biological Memo Appendix D.3 Jurisdictional Delineation Appendix D.4 Addendum to the Jurisdictional Delineation Appendix D.5 Joint Project Review Appendix E.1 Cultural Report Appendix E.2 2017 & 2006 Cultural Reports Appendix F Supplemental Energy Memo Appendix G.1 Geotechnical Evaluation Appendix G.2 Paleontological Report Appendix H Greenhouse Gas Analysis Appendix 1.1 Radius Map Report (EDR) Appendix 1.2 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix J.1 Hydrology Report Appendix J.2 Water Quality Management Plan Appendix J.3 Drainage Master Plan Appendix K Land Use Consistency Analysis Tables Appendix L.1 Noise Study Appendix L.2 Off -Site Utility Field Noise Study Appendix M.1 Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix M.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation Appendix N.1 Approved Water Supply Assessment Appendix N.2 Water Supply Assessment Verification Letter Travertine Draft EIR xv October 2023 27 Page intentionally blank IWI DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA EIR Preparers EIR Preparers This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) was prepared by the City of La Quinta (City) with the assistance of MSA Consulting, Incorporated. Report preparers and consultants are identified as follows, along with agencies, and individuals that provided information used to prepare this Draft EIR. Lead Agency The City of La Quinta Planning Division 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-777-7000 Cheri Flores, Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-777-7067 Email: clflores@laquintaca.Rov EIR Preparers MSA Consulting, Inc. 34200 Bob Hope Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Phone: 760-320-9822 Michelle Witherspoon, Director of Environmental Services Jesus Herrera -Cortez, Senior Environmental Planner, GIS Analyst Nicole Vann, Planner Asia Lee, Environmental Planner Technical Report Preparers LESA Report Update, Fire Master Plan - TRG Land 898 Production Place Newport Beach, CA 92663 Travertine Draft EIR i-1 October 2023 'W7 EIR PREPARERS AQ GHG, Traffic, VMT Reports — Urban Crossroads, Inc. 1197 Los Angeles Avenue, Suite C-256 Simi Valley, CA 93065 Phone: 805-426-4477 Haseeb Qureshi, Associate Principal (AQ and GHG Report and Memo) Alyssa Tamase (AQ Report) Ali Dadabhoy (AQ and GHG Memo) John Kain, AICP Principal (Traffic Impact Analysis) Marlie Whiteman, Principal Engineer (Traffic Impact Analysis) Janette Cachola (Traffic Impact Analysis) Bill Lawson, Principal Engineer, INCE (Noise Study) Biological Report, Jurisdictional Delineation — Michael Baker International 5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Richard Beck, PWS, CERP, CPESC, Vice President Tom Millington, Senior Biologist Arthur Popp, Senior Biologist Tim Tidwell, Regulatory Specialist Cultural and Paleontological Report — SWCA Environmental Consultants 51 West Dayton Street Pasadena, CA 91105 Stephanie Cimino, MS Mandi Martinez, MA, RPA Alyssa Bell, PhD Mathew Carson, MS Geotechnical Report — NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Anthony Zepeda, CEG 2681, Project Geologist Terri Wright, CEG 1342, Principal Geologist Shahrooz "Bob" Karimi, RCE 54250, Principal Engineer Drainage Master Plan — Q3 Consulting 27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110 Foothill Ranch, CA 92610 Travertine Draft EIR i-2 October 2023 30 EIR PREPARERS Hydrology Report, WQMP — Proactive Engineering Consultants 27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110 Foothill Ranch, CA 92610 Mark Anderson, PE Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment — GEO Forward 445 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3100 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Crystal Toogood, Staff Environmental Scientist Michael J. Sabo, Project Manager, Environmental Professional Adam A. Kaligi, PG 9287, Professional Geologist WSA and LESA Report — The Altum Group 73710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 219 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Travertine Draft EIR i-3 October 2023 31 Page intentionally blank 32 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 1.0 Executive Summary Chapter 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Overview of the Executive Summary This chapter has been prepared pursuant to Section 15123 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, which states that an EIR Summary shall: 1) contain a brief summary of the proposed action; 2) identify each significant effect of the project and proposed mitigation measures that would reduce or avoid each significant effect; 3) identify alternatives that would reduce or avoid identified significant effects; 4) identify areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency, including issues raised by other agencies and the public; and 5), identify issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives, and whether or how to mitigate the Project's significant effects. 1.2 Summary of the Proposed Action 1.2.1 Travertine Proposed Project The Project is proposing an amendment to the 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan (referred herein as the "1995 Specific Plan") which would have the effect of reducing the development's impact footprint and development intensity and increasing habitat conservation and avoidance relative to the approved 1995 Specific Plan. The Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004) proposes the development of a mix of uses consisting of up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types, a resort facility with up to 100 villas, recreational uses such as a golf training facility, clubhouse, neighborhood parks, a public trail system and recreational open space, natural open space for conservation on approximately 358 acres, and supporting water supply and on -site and off -site drainage and utilities infrastructure. Primary ingress and egress for the Project property will be through the (future) extension of Jefferson Street from the north, and a proposed extension of Avenue 62 from the east. See Section 3.5, Proposed Project, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for a full description of the Project and Project components. The Project is proposed to be graded and developed in phases. Project grading will occur in two phases: Phases A and B. Grading Phase A will grade the southern half of the Project property's development footprint, improve, and extend Avenue 62, and provide an emergency vehicle access (EVA) route to connect to Madison Street. Grading Phase B grading will grade the northern half of the Project property's development footprint and extend Jefferson Street to a point of connection. Grading Phases A and B is estimated to take two years each and the phases may overlap by six months to a year. Construction of the Project is proposed in four phases: 1A, 113, 2, and 3. Construction Phase Travertine Draft EIR 1-1 October 2023 33 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1A would develop 339 low density residential units on 164.4 acres, the resort/golf training facility and related facilities on 46.2 acres, and approximately 23.1 acres of open space recreation. Phase 1B will develop 191 low density residential units on 64.2 acres, 74 medium density residential units on 14.8 acres, and open space recreational uses on 14.7 acres. Construction Phase 2 will develop 143 low density residential units and 163 medium density residential units. Finally, Construction Phase 3 will develop the remaining 290 dwelling units (85 low density residential and 205 medium density residential) on approximately 55.3 acres of the Project property, the resort/spa on 38.3 acres, and approximately 18.1 acres of open space recreational uses. Table 1-1,1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan, shows the comparison between the land uses approved in the 1995 Specific Plan, and the proposed Project. Table 1-1, Travertine Land Use Plan Summary, provides a summary of the proposed land uses. Table 1-1 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan Specific Plan Element Approved Specific Plan Proposed Specific Plan Acreage 909 855 Dwelling Units 2,300 1,200 Resort 10 acres of commercial uses 100 Room Resort and Wellness Spa 500 room resort/hotel Golf Training and Practices Facility Golf 36-hole golf course with associated Public Recreational and Commercial Elements Tennis Club Tennis club Tennis club removed Private recreation in individual Private recreation in individual Private Recreation developments developments 365.3 acres of Recreational 55.9 acres of Recreational Open Other Open Space Open Space, including two golf Space; 301.2 acres Natural courses; 12.2 acres of Natural (Restricted) Open Space Open Space Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, Table 1, 2022. Table 1-2 Travertine Land Use Plan Summary Land Use Acres Percent of Project Residential (Low and Medium Density) 378.8 44.3 Resort/Golf Club and Banquet Facilities 84.5 9.9 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 4.1 Open Space (Recreation and Natural) 357.1 41.7 Total 855.4 100 percent Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, Table 2, 2022. Along with a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004), the Applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2017-0002) to change the General Plan Land Use Map for the Specific Plan Project area to be consistent with the land uses proposed in the Specific Plan Amendment, and Travertine Draft EIR 1-2 October 2023 34 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY revise the Circulation Element Roadway Classification Map to remove Madison Street as a General Plan Roadway from south of Avenue 60 to Avenue 62, and to realign Jefferson Street within the boundaries of the Specific Plan. The Project also proposes a Zone Change (ZC 2017-0002) to revise the City's Zoning Map to be consistent with the land uses proposed in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The Applicant is also requesting approval of a Large Lot Tentative Tract Map No. 37387 (TTM 2017-0008) to illustrate the concept of the proposed site, including proposed multi -use trails or the location of proposed gates, and how it corresponds with existing conditions and surrounding uses. Finally, the approval of a Development Agreement would vest the applicant's right to develop the Project, as well as ensure the timely completion of infrastructure to serve the Project and surrounding area. In addition to these entitlements from the City of La Quinta, the Applicant is also requesting additional right-of-way along Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 from the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), respectively, in order to widen and/or extend these roads into the Project property. Off -site improvements that will support full Project buildout comprise an additional Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation and up to five Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) wells (collectively, "offsite utility field"). The locations of the well sites and substation have not yet been determined but are anticipated to be located within a 2-mile radius northeast and east of the Project site. The substation and well sites will be developed in compliance with IID's and CVWD's standards (respectively). The impacts of the offsite utility field are analyzed in this DEIR at a programmatic level because the location of the facilities have not yet been determined. IID and CVWD will conduct project -level review of the substation and wells, respectively, prior to approving these facilities. 1.2.2 Discretionary Actions and Other Approvals Required for the Proposed Project Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency and has discretionary authority over the Project. With the exception of the off -site utility field, which is analyzed at a programmatic level, this EIR has been prepared as a Project -level EIR and will be relied on by the City for purposes of CEQA compliance in acting on the Project applications for entitlements. The EIR is also intended to be relied upon for purposes of CEQA compliance by all State and local public agencies, other than the Lead Agency, which have discretionary approval power over the project. Under CEQA, such agencies are referred to as "Responsible Agencies." A list of Responsible Agencies is provided at Section 3.11 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, of the EIR, and include the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Travertine Draft EIR 1-3 October 2023 35 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of La Quinta is the lead agency under CEQA and has the principal approval authority over the proposed Project. The following discretionary actions and approvals are required by the City: • Certification of the EIR (EA 2017-0008) • Adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2017-0002) • Adoption of a Zone Change (ZC 2017-0002) • Adoption of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004) • Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 37387 (TTM 37387) (TTM 2017-0008) • Approval of a Development Agreement (DA 2021-0001) In addition, the proposed Project will require approval from the following federal, State and local agencies: • Bureau of Land Management o Approval of additional right-of-way along Jefferson Street to widen and/or extend the road to the Project site. • Bureau of Reclamation o Approval of additional right-of-way along Avenue 62 in order to widen and/or extend the road into the Project site. Approval of a portion of the extension of Madison as an EVA for the project and access for CVWD. • United States Fish and Wildlife Service o Implementation of Project -specific 1995 Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit and June 2, 2023 Concurrence in Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Reclamation's No Adverse Effects Determination • United States of Army Corps of Engineers o Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) or similar approval from the Corps to receive concurrence that ephemeral aquatic features within the Project site do not qualify as waters of the U.S. (WoUS) and therefore are not subject to regulation under Section 404 • California Department of Fish and Wildlife o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 for the water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • State Water Resources Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (Region 7) o Construction Stormwater General Permit, Notice of Intent to Comply with Section 402 of the Clean Water Act o Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) • Coachella Valley Water District o Approval of the proposed water tanks and related infrastructure; off -site and on -site drainage systems, improvements to the Guadalupe dikes in conjunction with the improvements to Jefferson Street; o Approval of Regional and Local Hydrology/Drainage Studies Travertine Draft EIR 1-4 October 2023 36 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY o Water Supply Assessment (WSA) o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 for the water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • South Coast Air Quality Management District o PM-10 Plan for compliance with Rule 403.1; Dust Control in the Coachella Valley. • Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 forthe water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • Imperial Irrigation District o Review and approval of the proposed substation site and related agreements with the Project applicant o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 forthe water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). 1.3 Summary of Project Impacts Chapter 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, of this Draft EIR presents the environmental impact analysis for all CEQA resource topics and identifies mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to a less than significant level, where appropriate and feasible. A summary of all impacts and mitigation measures is provided in Table 1-3 at the end of this summary. Table 1-3 identifies the potentially significant effects of the proposed project, mitigation measures, project features and/or requirements identified to avoid or reduce the identified potentially significant effects to less than significant levels, and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures, project features and/or requirements to reduce the potentially significant effects to a level of less than significant. As shown in the Table, Project impacts to Air Quality (limited to volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions) and related conflicts with the Eastern Coachella Valley Community Emissions Reduction Plan during operation of Phases 2 and 3; Greenhouse Gas Emissions due to the Project's exceedance of quantitative significance thresholds; and Transportation associated with residential vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) will be significant and unavoidable even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the EIR. Accordingly, Findings a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared, and will be considered by the City as a part of its review of the EIR. The draft statement will set forth information, considerations and findings that are supportive of the goals and benefits of the Project as a whole. Travertine Draft EIR 1-5 October 2023 37 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1.4.1 Alternatives Considered for Evaluation Three alternatives to the Project were considered for evaluation and compared to the proposed project. The following provides a summary of the Alternatives Analysis provided in Chapter 7.0, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR. As further discussed in Chapter 7.0, of the Alternatives considered in the EIR, Alternative 1 (No Project/No Build) is environmentally superior to the other Alternatives because this Alternative would avoid the significant impacts identified for the Project. This Alternative also reduces the environmental impacts to the greatest degree as compared to the other alternatives. Of the remaining alternatives, Alternative 3 (Phase 1 Only) would be the environmentally superior alternative because it would result in lesser impacts than Alternative 2 or the Project. Alternative 1: No Project / No Build Under the No Project / No Build ("Alternative 1"), the Project would remain in its current vacant and undeveloped condition. The site previously operated as a vineyard in the northern portion of the site. The disturbed area includes approximately 220 acres of the Project that previously operated as a vineyard. Vineyard operations have been abandoned since 2007 and the vineyard has remained unused, leaving only trellises and the unutilized utilities. The existing visual character and visual resources would remain the same. Alternative 1 would not have any significant and unavoidable impacts. Alternative 2: Originally Approved Specific Plan Implementation of Alternative 2 would involve approximately 909 acres and include 2,300 dwelling units, commercial uses on 10 acres, 500-room resort/hotel, 36-hole golf course, a tennis club, private recreation in individual developments, and 378 acres of open space (including golf course). Alternative 2 impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation, utilities, and wildfires would be increased compared to the proposed Project, since the Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative proposes a greater extent of land use and intensities. Alternative 3: Phase 1 (A and B) Only Under the Phase 1 (A and B) Only Alternative ("Alternative 3"), the project would develop Phase 1A and 1B of the project, which includes 600 residential dwelling units on approximately 243.4 acres, a resort/golf facility on approximately 46.2 acres, open space recreational on approximately 35.5 acres, Travertine Draft EIR 1-6 October 2023 38 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY and open space natural uses on approximately 301.2 acres. Development of Alternative 3 would include the westerly extension of Avenue 62. However, this Alternative would not develop the southerly extension of Jefferson Street. Significant impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, population and housing, transportation, and utilities would be reduced with Alternative 3, compared to the proposed Project and Alternative 2 but would be greater than the No Project Alternative. Of the Alternatives considered in this Draft EIR section, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in no impacts to the environment. A full discussion and analysis of the alternatives compared to the proposed Project is included in Chapter 7.0, Alternatives. Within this Chapter, an environmentally superior alternative is determined, and a summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives are provided in Table 7-4, Comparison of Alternatives and Project. 1.5 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved Areas of controversy relating to the proposed Project were identified during the circulation period of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). The Project received twelve comment letters during the review period; eight of which were from public agencies, and four from area residents. Comments received from area residents during the circulation period did not identify significant concerns regarding the Project. The comment letters received from area residents included additional clarification regarding Project transportation and maps included in the NOP. Comment letters received from public agencies during the circulation period raised issues regarding air quality, biological resources, electric facilities, and water quality permits and consultations. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) required that air quality be analyzed utilizing CalEEMod to determine the air quality impacts of the Project, specifically through mobile sources (via vehicular trips, heavy-duty diesel -fueled vehicles). This is analyzed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, and the Project -specific Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix C.1). The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) highlighted concerns regarding biological resources in the local habitat, and species potentially impacted by the Project. Project -related impacts to biological resources are analyzed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and associated biological resources reports and jurisdictional delineation (Appendix D.1, D.2, D.3 and D.4). Imperial Irrigation District (IID), in their comment letter, addressed the need for a new substation and IID easements required to serve the site. As discussed above, the EIR analyzes the substation at a programmatic level. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District required that the Project DEIR analyze the need for a NPDES permit, a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMAR), and consultation with CDFW, Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. These are discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. The Southern California Association of Travertine Draft EIR 1-7 October 2023 39 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Governments (SCAG) requested that the Project's consistency within the context of regional goals and policies as set forth in SCAG's 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy be analyzed in the Draft EIR. The Project's consistency (whether applicable or nonapplicable) is discussed in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, and Section 4.16, Transportation. The NOP comment letters received during the public comment period are included in Appendix A to this EIR. Project design features and mitigation measures have been identified to reduce impacts of the project, however, significant and unavoidable project -specific impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation were identified. Mitigation measures would reduce project -generated air quality, greenhouse gas, and transportation impacts to the extent feasible, but project -specific impacts would still be significant and unavoidable. The Mitigation Measures established for the proposed project are outlined in Table 1-3, Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures, below. Travertine Draft EIR 1-8 October 2023 40 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table 1-3 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation 4.1 Aesthetics Development of the substation, as part Mitigation Measures of the off -site utility field, would result in potential significant impacts (SI) to AES-1 In order to reduce the proposed substation's impact on the existing visual the visual character of the area where character and reduce the potential degradation of scenic quality of the it would be located. surrounding area, the Project applicant shall use one or more of the following Less Than Light and glare from materials and or comparable techniques: perimeter barriers, landscaping appropriate for the Significant equipment used in the substation may substation facility. Additionally, glare shall be controlled through the use of result in potential SI. non -reflective surfaces, dulling finishes to help blend the structures with the surroundings and reduce glare and color contrast, or comparable methods subject to the approval of IID. 4.2 Agricultural Resources and Forestry Resources The proposed Project would result in Mitigation Measures less than significant LTS impacts to g ( ) p None required. Less Than agricultural and forestry resources. Significant 4.3 Air Quality The Project could conflict with Mitigation Measures Significant implementation of applicable air AQ-1 The General Contractor and all sub -contractors shall ensure that during Project Unavoidable quality Plan and result in cumulatively and off -site utility construction activities, off -road diesel construction Impacts considerable net increase if any criteria equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, complies with EPA/CARB (VOC Only) pollutant; resulting in Significant Tier 4 off -road emissions standards or equivalent and shall ensure that all Unavoidable (SU) impacts. construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the Less Than manufacturer's specifications. Significant AQ-2 The Project applicant must comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 445 (Wood- (All Criteria Burning Devices), as amended, by explicitly prohibiting the use of wood burning Pollutants Other stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development. than VOC) Travertine Draft EIR 1-9 October 2023 41 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation Mitigation Measures to Reduce VOC from Mobile Sources: AQ-3 The Project operator shall provide and/or accommodate facilities within the Project property such as bicycle parking and storage, to encourage bicycle use instead of driving as a method to reduce or otherwise eliminate certain vehicle trips within the Project area. AQ-4 The Project operator of the on -site resort facilities shall implement procedures to accommodate remote work or telecommuting, as applicable to the work sectors, as a method to reduce commercial vehicle miles traveled. AQ-5 The Project operator shall encourage the use of low emission vehicles to reduce the reliance on gasoline or diesel fuel by providing charging stations and designated parking for emissions free vehicles. Mitigation Measures to Reduce VOCs from Consumer Products: AQ-6 The Project operator shall utilize "Super -Compliant" or otherwise non -aerosol dispersal/application methods (and/or low VOC products) in all Commercial Buildings including the Hotel, Spa and Golf Training Facility. This includes but is not limited to: air fresheners, cooking spray, floor maintenance products, furniture maintenance products, degreaser, oven cleaners, toilet care products. Project operators can refer to the CARB Consumer Product Program web site for the most current information. AQ-7 The Project operator shall utilize low VOC products to the greatest degree possible on all landscape maintenance activities associated with the Commercial Buildings, Golf Training grounds and Common Landscape Areas. These shall be applied with non -aerosol measures where possible. Applicable products include insecticides, pesticides, pool/spa disinfectants, grill cleaners. Project Travertine Draft EIR 1-10 October 2023 42 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation operators can refer to the CARB Consumer Product Program web site for the most current information. AQ-8 The Project operator shall require all commercial products to be diluted as directed. AQ-9 The Project operator shall use low -solvent or solvent -free paints for all commercial buildings and common area monumentation or walls (including repairs.) AQ-10 The Project operator shall minimize the use of pesticides with high organic solvent contents, and/or the use of emulsions and water -based formulations. 4.4 Biological Resources The Project could result in SI to Mitigation Measures candidate, sensitive or special status BI0-1 Consistent with the terms of the Project Biological Opinion, an 8-foot-tall species, riparian habitat, or conflict wildlife fence constructed of tubular steel and painted to blend in with the with an applicable habitat desert environment shall be installed where the Project interfaces with Coral conservation plan. Mountain along the northern boundary and extend southward along the western and southern boundary of proposed development to preclude PBS from entering the Project. The fence shall extend to where Avenue 62 Less than intersects with the eastern Project boundary. Significant BI0-2 All lighting located within the development footprint shall conform with the requirements outlined in the Travertine Specific Plan and the MSHCP. BI0-3 Where the Project is located adjacent to the SRSJM Conservation Area along its western edge, a minimum buffer of 74 feet shall be incorporated between SRSJM undeveloped native desert areas and private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas. Each private homeowner parcel along this western edge Travertine Draft EIR October 2023 43 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation shall have fencing at the top of slope with Lexan panels to dampen noise to an appropriate level. B10-4 All plant species identified as invasive by the CVMSHP, or that are known to be toxic to PBS, will be prohibited from inclusion in Project landscaping including areas adjacent to proposed open space. Prior to site disturbance a Project - specific list of prohibited plant species will be prepared by a qualified biologist for use in developing the Project Landscape Plan. This will include plants identified as invasive by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) and the CVMSHCP. The City shall review the landscape palette prior to planting. BI0-5 The final design and location of natural trails will be approved by the USFWS and the City to minimize disturbance to PBS. Unauthorized trails currently in use on the Property will be closed to minimize impacts to bighorn sheep and replaced with the trail proposed as part of the Project. Other than this trail, no additional trails would be proposed or allowed as part of the Project. To restrict human access to surrounding hills, including: (a) placement of "no trespass" signs at legally enforceable intervals along the trail and habitat/development interface, with legally enforceable language; (b) development of CC&Rs and educational materials that explain to residents and members the ecology of bighorn sheep and the rules concerning unauthorized hiking into sheep habitat. BI0-6 Project proponent shall permanently protect 19.7 acres in Section 5 as bighorn sheep habitat. Prior to recording the first final map, Project proponent also has committed to acquire an additional approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 that also are strategically located to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller units with reduced development potential. All lands proposed for conservation in Section 5 will be approved by the Service and protected in perpetuity consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq. Travertine Draft EIR 1-12 October 2023 44 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation For more detail, please refer to the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment. BI0-7 Project proponent shall establish a $500,000 endowment with the Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM) to be managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to assist with the long-term management of bighorn sheep. Of this total, $100,000 will be provided upon issuance of the first grading permit, with the balance of $400,000 paid in installments of $100,000 per year over the succeeding four years. BI0-8 Project proponent shall provide an additional $100,000 to the CNLM endowment above to support the gathering of information on the effects of the regional trails system on bighorn sheep, including trails in and around the Project site. BI0-9 The Jefferson Street extension through Section 32 will be constructed using active and passive design features to prevent public roadside parking and foot access into bighorn sheep habitat (e.g., boulders, k-rail, berm, narrow road shoulder, bar ditch, and restrictive signage), subject to review and approval by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. BIO-10 Within the project boundary, approximately 100 yards at the west end of the newly constructed Jefferson Street Loop in the southwest comer of Section 33, where it connects with the Avenue 62 alignment, will be left as undeveloped desert. The distance in some places will be less than 100 yards but other features such as "manufactured slopes" and "property fences" will be used, as shown in Figure 4 — BO Conservation Measure #7 of the Project Biological Opinion. This design feature, in combination with enhanced native landscaping, will discourage unauthorized vehicle access into bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 adjacent to the Travertine project boundary. Travertine Draft EIR 1-13 October 2023 45 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation BIO-11 No exotic plants known to be toxic to PBS, or invasive in desert environments, will be used in project landscaping. BIO-12 The Project shall not provide direct public access from internal streets to hillside sheep habitat. BIO-13 The Project Nature Trail will form the southern and western perimeters of the Project. BIO-14 To deter bighorn sheep access to the project site, natural landscaping and property fences around residential areas would reduce noise, light, and visual impacts on surrounding hills. BIO-15 The best management practices shall be used to preclude the establishment of potential disease vectors at open water features (i.e., water bodies will be designed with steep, unvegetated slopes and deep enough water to prevent establishment of emergent wetland vegetation). BIO-16 CC&R's and Project Specific Plan conditions shall prohibit activities that emit noise above specified levels (not to exceed 60 dB(A) for sensitive receptors or 75 dB(A) for nonresidential receptors (per City Ordinance 9.100.210 Noise Control). For example, only quiet electric golf carts will be used for service and maintenance. BIO-17 Outdoor lighting will be down -shielded and directed away from the hillsides in accordance with the City municipal code. BIO-18 To increase public awareness regarding the sensitivity of PBS in the region, educational materials will be provided to homeowners and made available to users of the public facilities within the Travertine development. This material will be prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Travertine Draft EIR 1-14 October 2023 46 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation CDFW. In addition, the Project proponent will provide within the project an area dedicated as an interpretive center concerning the bighorn sheep. BIO-19 The two water reservoirs will be constructed of steel or concrete and buried underground to the extent possible, or screened by landscaped berms. Any tank appurtenances (e.g., valves) remaining above -ground will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat and to prevent light from being reflected toward sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains. BIO-20 Dogs and other pets are not allowed within the National Monument and appropriate signage at the designated trailhead parking areas and any other access points will be installed to prohibit dogs along the Nature Trail. CC&Rs and club rules will require pets to remain on a leash while outside enclosed areas, and will prohibit pets from entering the hills at any time. Compliance with the local "leash law" will also be enforced pursuant to City ordinance and the project's Specific Plan conditions. BIO-21 The acreage of the Project Site that is located within the MSHCP Conservation Area shall be dedicated to Conservation in perpetuity. BIO-22 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent will provide a no -interest $2,000,000 loan to the CVCC or its designee upon mutually agreeable terms to acquire essential bighorn sheep habitat in the project area. This provision may be revised or substituted for in a manner of equal or greater benefit to the Plan upon mutual agreement of CVCC, the Wildlife Agencies, and the Project proponent. BIO-23 A Qualified Biologist will prepare and present to each employee (including temporary, contractors, and subcontractors) a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) prior to the worker's initiation of work on the Travertine Draft EIR 1-15 October 2023 47 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation Project site. Workers shall also be advised by the Qualified Biologist of the special -status wildlife species in the Project site, the steps to avoid impacts to the species and the potential penalties for taking such species. At a minimum, the WEAP will include the following information: occurrence of the listed and sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, legal protection afforded to these species, penalties for violations of federal and State laws, reporting requirements, and Project features and mitigation measures designed to reduce the impacts to these species and promote continued successful occupation of habitats within the Project area. Included in this WEAP will be color photographs of the listed species, which will be shown to the employees. Following the WEAP, the photographs will be posted in the contractor and resident engineer office, where they will remain through the duration of the Project. The contractor, resident engineer, and the Qualified Biologist will be responsible for ensuring that employees are aware of the listed species and observe reporting and mitigation and avoidance requirements. A record of all trained personnel will be kept with the construction foreman onsite. If new construction personnel are added to the project, the construction foreman will ensure that new personnel receive WEAP training before they start working. BIO-24 Prior to issuance of grading permit, a qualified biologist will be designated to monitor construction activities and advise construction personnel of the sensitive biological resources on site that may be impacted by, and conversely, that must be avoided during site development. A biological monitor will be on site to monitor avoidance activities and to monitor all clearing and grubbing activities, as well as grading, excavation, and/or other ground -disturbing activities in jurisdictional areas to ensure that impacts do not exceed the limits of grading and to minimize the likelihood of inadvertent impacts on special - Travertine Draft EIR 1-16 October 2023 48 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation status species. The monitor will flush avian species and remove and relocate, if possible, non -avian species to a safe location outside of the immediate construction zone (generally 1,000 feet or more onto public lands, when feasible). Where appropriate, the biological monitor will mark/flag the limits of environmental sensitive areas (ESAs) to restrict project activities near the areas. These restricted areas will be monitored to protect the species during construction. The biological monitor will ensure that all biological mitigation measures, BMPs, avoidance and protection measures described in the relevant project permits, approvals, licenses, and environmental reports, and CEQA documents, are in place and are adhered to. Monitoring will cease when the sensitive habitats and jurisdictional areas have been cleared or impacted. The biological monitor will ensure that construction activities will maintain measures to prevent accidental trapping of wildlife into excavated areas and inspect excavated areas daily to detect the presence of trapped wildlife. All deep or steep -walled excavated areas should be covered with plywood or other weight bearing material and will be furnished with escape ramps at a 3:1 slope or are surrounded with exclusionary fencing in order to prevent wildlife from entering them. Trapped wildlife should be relocated out of harm's way to a suitable habitat outside of the project area. The biological monitor will have the authority to temporarily halt all construction activities and all non -emergency actions if ESAs and special -status species are identified and will be directly impacted. The monitor will notify the appropriate resource agency and consult if needed. If needed, and if possible, the biological monitor will relocate the individual outside of the work area where it will not be harmed. Work can continue at the location if the project Travertine Draft EIR 1-17 October 2023 49 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation proponent and the consulted resource agency determine that the activity will not result in impacts on the species. All biological monitor observations of special -status species will be documented and mapped in monitoring logs. Monitoring logs will be completed for each day of monitoring. All special -status species recordings will be submitted to the CNDDB. The biological monitors will be responsible for documenting compliance with avoidance measures, the results of the surveys and the ongoing monitoring, and will provide a copy of the monitoring reports for impact areas to the County EPD and any permitting agencies that require reporting. The appropriate agencies will be notified if a dead or injured protected species is located within the project site. Written notification will be made within 15 days of the date and time of the finding or incident (if known) and will include: location of the carcass, a photograph, cause of death (if known), and other pertinent information. BIO-25 Prior to issuance of grading permits and commencement of any ground - disturbing activities or vegetation removal the following measures would be implemented to avoid impacts on ESAs, surrounding habitats, and special status species and wildlife: a. Project footprint would be set at the minimum size to accomplish necessary work, and the footprint will be of a size/area no greater than is identified in the CEQA documentation, to minimize impacts on sensitive biological resources. b. Specifications for the project boundary, limits of grading, project related parking, storage areas, laydown sites, and equipment storage areas would be mapped and clearly marked in the field with temporary fencing, signs, Travertine Draft EIR 1-18 October 2023 50 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation stakes, flags, rope, cord, or other appropriate markers. All markers would be maintained until the completion of activities in that area. c. To minimize the amount of disturbance, the construction/laydown activities, parking, staging, storage, spoil management, and equipment access will be restricted to designated areas. Designated areas will comprise existing disturbed areas (parking lots, access roads, graded areas, etc.) to the extent possible. d. Designated staging areas will be enclosed with temporary security fencing. All staging areas will comply with conditions in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP), which provides BMPs to avoid or mitigate erosion impacts during construction. e. Project -related work limits would be defined and work crews would be restricted to designated work areas. Disturbance beyond the actual construction zone will be prohibited without site -specific surveys. If sensitive biological resources are detected in an area to be impacted, then appropriate measures would be implemented to avoid impacts (i.e., flag and avoid, erect orange construction fencing, biological monitor present during work, etc.). However, if avoidance is not possible and the sensitive biological resources would be directly impacted by project activities, the biologist would mark and/or stake the site(s) and map the individuals on an aerial map and with a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. The biologist would then contact the appropriate resource agencies to develop additional avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures prior to commencing project activities. Travertine Draft EIR 1-19 October 2023 51 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation f. ESAs would be identified, mapped, clearly marked in the field, and avoided to the maximum extent practicable in order to avoid and minimize impacts on sensitive biological resources. g. Existing roads and trails would be utilized wherever possible to avoid unnecessary impacts. Project related vehicle traffic would be restricted to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas. Travel outside construction zones will be prohibited. h. Monitoring would occur periodically during the length of construction activities to ensure project limits, designated areas (parking, storage, etc.), and ESAs are still clearly marked. i. Signs will be installed on boundaries of the Project Site and other strategic locations to notify the public of the sensitive biological resources identified onsite and prohibit entry into key high value habitat areas. BIO-26 Prior to construction, the construction area and adjacent habitat within 500 feet of the construction area, or to the edge of the property if less than 500 feet, will be surveyed by a Qualified Biologist for burrows that could be used by burrowing owl. Two (2) surveys will be conducted, with one survey to be conducted between 14 and 30 days prior to site disturbance, and a second survey to be conducted within 24 hours of site disturbance, following methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 2012). If a burrow is located, the Qualified Biologist will determine if an owl is present in the burrow. If the burrow is determined to be occupied, the burrow will be flagged and a 160-foot buffer during the non -breeding season and a 250-foot buffer during the breeding season, or a buffer to the edge of the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the burrow. The buffer will be staked and flagged. Travertine Draft EIR 1-20 October 2023 52 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation No construction will be permitted within the buffer until the young are no longer dependent on the burrow. If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow will be made inaccessible to burrowing owls, and construction activities may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, burrowing owls shall be relocated pursuant to accepted protocols and in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies (CDFW and USFWS). A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that, based on surveys conducted following protocol, at least one burrowing owl has been observed occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. If there are no records for the site, surveys must be conducted to determine, prior to construction, if burrowing owls are present. Determination of the appropriate method of relocation, such as eviction/passive relocation or active relocation, shall be based on the specific site conditions (e.g., distance to nearest suitable habitat and presence of burrows within that habitat) in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and maintenance of suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. BIO-27 Prior to the start of construction activities during the nesting season (February 1s'through August 31") in modeled Le Conte's thrasher habitat in the SRSJM Conservation Area, surveys will be Conducted by a Qualified Biologist on the construction site and within 500 feet of the construction site, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet. If nesting Le Conte's thrashers are found, a 500- foot buffer, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the nest site. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No construction will be permitted within the buffer during the breeding season (January 15 through June 15) or until the young have fledged. Travertine Draft EIR 1-21 October 2023 53 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation BIO-28 Vegetation clearing shall be conducted outside of the nesting season, which is generally identified as February 1 through August 31. Alternatively, and only if avoidance of the nesting season is not feasible, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days prior to any disturbance of the site, including disking, demolition activities, and grading. If active nests are identified, the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and the juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests. BIO-29 Drainage and Toxics: Project stormwater runoff will be conveyed eastward toward the Dike 4 impound and away from Project surrounding open space, and SRSJM Conservation Area. Stormwater retention basins are designed to provide requisite water quality treatment, including bio-remediation. Subsequent engineering will include preparation of a SWPPP that will ensure against increased runoff and protect water quality during and post - construction. BIO-30 Artificial Lighting: Night lighting shall be directed away from adjacent open space and SRSJM Conservation Area to protect wildlife from direct night lighting. Light fixtures adjacent to open space will be shielded and utilize low intensity lighting. If night lighting is required during construction, shielding shall be incorporated to ensure ambient lighting adjacent conservation lands are not increased. BIO-31 Noise: The Project will incorporate setbacks, as specified in the Specific Plan to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife. BIO-32 Unauthorized Access: The Project will incorporate signage, fencing, gates, and similar measures and barriers to inform the hiking public and to avoid or minimize unauthorized access to adjacent open space lands. Travertine Draft EIR 1-22 October 2023 54 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation BIO-33 California Desert Native Plants Act: The applicant will collect California Desert Native Plan Act protected plants, including California barrel cactus (Ferocactus cylindraceus), Gander's buckhorn cholla (Cylindropuntia ganderi), Englemann's hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus engelmannii), cottontop cactus (Echinocactus polycephalus), beavertail cactus (Opuntia basilaris), branched pencil cholla (Cylindropuntia ramossissima), ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens), catclaw (Acacia greggii), blue paloverde (Parkinsonia florida), and smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus) and prioritize reuse of plant materials onsite. A permit from the Agriculture Commissioner of the County of Riverside shall be obtained prior to collection and relocation of these species. BIO-34 Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the project, and prior to initiating any work that may impact jurisdictional waters identified in the Travertine Project Biological Resources Assessment, the Project -specific Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International, and the off -site utility field assessment prepared by Michael Baker International, dated March 2022, June 2021, and June 2022, respectively, the Project proponent shall provide notice to CDFW and obtain a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement as required pursuant to California Fish and Game Code sections 1602-1616. BIO-35 Impacts to CDFW jurisdictional waters shall be mitigated pursuant to a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) which will be prepared to identify specific on -site and/or off -site mitigation activities that will be implemented to compensate for unavoidable impacts to CDFW jurisdictional areas. The HMMP will identify the mitigation program coordinated with and approved by CDFW, set mitigation success criteria, and guide a five-year qualitative and quantitative mitigation monitoring program to track mitigation success. Annual Travertine Draft EIR 1-23 October 2023 55 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation reports will be submitted to CDFW each year for five years, summarizing mitigation performance against the success criteria. Mitigation measures identified above would also be applied to the off -site utility fields when applicable. Mitigation Measures specific to the offsite utility field Biological Resources are identified subsequently. BIO-36 A general biological field survey to document existing conditions and the suitability of habitats within the utility field parcels to support special -status wildlife species such as burrowing owl, which could potentially occur on -site. Regardless of focused survey findings, if suitable habitat for burrowing owl is present, two (2) separate preconstruction surveys are required prior to any ground disturbance, one no less than 14 days prior to disturbance, and the other within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance. Should take of burrowing owl be expected, a relocation plan and extensive coordination to move animals offsite can be expected. BIO-37 A regulatory specialist should be consulted to determine if a jurisdictional delineation is necessary. If so, a jurisdictional delineation should be conducted to determine the presence or absence and potential regulatory status of any jurisdictional features should it be determined they may be impacted by installation of water wells and the electric power substation within a proposed impact area. Impacts to jurisdictional features may require regulatory permits from the USACE, RWQCB, and/or the CDFW as applicable. 4.5 Cultural Resources Development of the Project could Mitigation Measures result in SI to cultural resources and CR-1 Prior to an ground -disturbing activities, the Project applicant shall retain a y g g � pp Less than human remains. qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist that meets the Secretary Significant Travertine Draft EIR 1-24 October 2023 56 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation of Interior's Standards for professional archaeology, to carry out all mitigation measures related to cultural resources. Tribal monitoring of site disturbance will also be accommodated. CR-2 The Project applicant shall assign a compliance officer for the Project to ensure mitigation measures are in place and followed for the duration of Project construction. The compliance officer should prepare a monthly compliance report for distribution to the City, BOR, BLM, and interested Native American groups. The compliance officer may be the same person as the Project archaeologist or may be another qualified individual designated by the Project applicant. CR-3 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbance, a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Monitoring Plan) shall be prepared. The Monitoring Plan shall include, but not be limited to: principles and procedures for the identification of cultural resources monitoring protocols consistent with CR-1, CR-2 and CR-7 for ground -disturbing activities, a worker training program consistent with CR-6, and discovery and processing protocols for inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources consistent with CR-7 and CR-8. The plan shall detail protocols for determining circumstances in which additional or reduced levels of monitoring (e.g., spot checking) may be appropriate. Fencing with a buffer shall be placed around resources to be avoided. The Monitoring Plan shall also establish a protocol for communicating with the lead agencies and interested Native American parties. CR-4 Prior to ground -disturbing activities in any areas outside the APE described in the Project EIR, Exhibit 4.5-1, including but not limited to locations proposed for the off -site utility field, a supplemental study including an updated records search at the EIC, updated Sacred Lands File search, and pedestrian survey, Travertine Draft EIR 1-25 October 2023 57 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation shall be conducted. If resources are identified and cannot be avoided, they shall be assessed for their eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR. Avoidance and minimization measures identified as a result of the study shall be incorporated into the Monitoring Plan. CR-S In the event of unanticipated discovery of NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources within the APE or the off -site utility field, where operationally feasible, such resources shall be protected from direct project impacts by project redesign (i.e., relocation of the ground disturbance, ancillary facilities, or temporary facilities or work areas). Avoidance mechanisms shall include temporary fencing and designation of such areas as environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) for the duration of the proposed Project. ESAs shall include the boundary of each historic property plus a 30-meter (98-foot) buffer around the resource. CR-6 Prior to the commencement of ground -disturbing activities, typically at the Project kick-off, the qualified archaeologist or their designee will provide cultural sensitivity training to construction crews. The training will provide information on signs of potential cultural resources, regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural resources and the proper procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources discoveries be made during construction. Workers will be provided contact information and protocols to follow if inadvertent discoveries are made. Workers will be shown examples of the types of tribal cultural resources that might be encountered and that would require notification of the project archaeologist. The Project archaeologist shall create a training video, PowerPoint presentation, or printed literature that can be shown to new workers and contractors for continuous training throughout the life of the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 1-26 October 2023 58 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation CR-7 Prior to ground disturbance, an archaeological monitor, working under the supervision of the qualified archaeologist, and Native American monitors from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, shall be retained to monitor ground -disturbing activities. Monitoring will take place within or near ESAs or in other areas agreed upon by the archaeologist, City, and Native American monitor, and as identified in the Monitoring Plan. Monitoring activities will include examining the excavation of native soils as well as the disposal of spoils in certain areas. The duration, timing and location of the monitoring shall be determined by the City in consultation with the qualified archaeologist and Native American monitors as outlined in the Monitoring Plan. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer. Additionally, fencing with a buffer shall be required around resources to be avoided. CR-8 In the event that cultural resources are exposed during excavation, work in the immediate vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the find. Ground -disturbing activities may continue in other areas. For discoveries located outside of BLM land, if the City determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis by the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is a protected resource under CEQA (Section 15064.5f; PRC 21082) additional work such as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of ground -disturbing activity in the location of discovery. For discoveries located on BLM-land, if the BLM determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis by the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is protected under Section 106 of the NHPA, additional work such Travertine Draft EIR 1-27 October 2023 59 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of ground - disturbing activity in the location of discovery. Should any tribal cultural resources be encountered, additional consultation with California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)—listed tribal groups should be conducted in coordination with the City and/or with the BLM and BOR if the discovery occurs on federal lands. CR-9 If human remains are encountered, pursuant to State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. Additional procedures for responding to the unanticipated discovery of human remains are outlined below. Modern Remains If the Coroner's Office determines the remains are of modern origin, the appropriate law enforcement officials will be called by the Coroner and conduct the required procedures. Work will not resume until law enforcement has released the area. Archaeological Remains If the remains are determined to be archaeological in origin, the appropriate protocol is determined by whether the discovery site is located on federally or non -federally owned or managed lands. Remains Discovered on Federally Owned or Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined that the remains are archaeological or historic in age, the appropriate BLM Palm Springs Field Office or BOR archaeologist must be called. The archaeologist will initiate the proper Travertine Draft EIR 1-28 October 2023 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation procedures under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). If the remains can be determined to be Native American, the steps as outlined in NAGPRA, 43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 10.6 Inadvertent discoveries, must be followed. Resumption of Activity: The activity that resulted in the discovery of human remains on federal lands may resume after a written, binding agreement is executed between the BLM or BOR and federally recognized affiliated Indian Tribe(s) that adopts a recovery plan for the excavation or removal of the human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony following 43 CFR Section 10.3(b)(1) of these regulations. The disposition of all human remains and NAGPRA items shall be carried out following 43 CFR 10.6. Remains Discovered on Non -Federally Owned/Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined the remains on non -federally owned or managed lands are archaeological, the Coroner will make recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the remains to the person responsible for the excavation or discovery, or to his or her authorized representative. If the Coroner believes the remains to be those of a Native American, he/she shall contact the California NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. The NAHC will notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendant (MLD) of the remains. The MLD has 48 hours after accessing the site of the discovery to make recommendations to the landowner for treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MLD does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does Travertine Draft EIR 1-29 October 2023 61 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Level of Potential Impacts on Mitigation Measure Significance after the Environment Mitigation not accept the descendant's recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the NAHC. 4.6 Energy Resources The proposed Project would result in Mitigation Measures Less than LTS impacts to energy resources. None required Significant 4.7 Geology and Soils The onsite soils could result in SI Mitigation Measures related to: seismic shaking, ground GEO-1 The Project developer shall implement the seismic design criteria and failure (including liquefaction), and parameters, in accordance with ASCE 7-16 and 2019 CBC, as set forth in the landslides; windborne and waterborne Project geotechnical evaluation. erosion; unstable geologic unit (i.e., liquefaction, landslides, rockfalls, GEO-2 The design of foundation and slabs (including bearing pressure collapse); and the potential of recommendations) shall be in conformance with the recommendations of the expansive soils onsite. Development Project structural engineer and as set forth in the Project geotechnical could result in SI related to evaluation. paleontological resources. GEO-3 Grading and excavations shall be performed in accordance with the City of La Less than Quinta Code and regulations and the General Earthwork and Grading Significant Specifications set forth in the Geotechnical Evaluation. Clearing and grubbing of the site shall include removal of any pavement or concrete, turf, landscaping, miscellaneous trash and debris, and disposal of deleterious material offsite. The soil engineering properties of imported soil (if any) shall be evaluated and certified by the Project geologist for use at the development site. GEO-4 Unsuitable earth materials shall be removed prior to placement of compacted fill. Unsuitable materials at the site include undocumented fills and weathered alluvial fan deposits as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation and as otherwise directed by the Project geologist. Travertine Draft EIR 1-30 October 2023 L. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation Excavation and grading to carry Project -serving roadways over the Dike No. 4 levee for the proposed Avenue 62 and Madison Street extensions, as well the Jefferson Street extension over the Dike No. 2 levee, should bench into competent existing fills on the sides with minimal removals on the top (1 to 2 feet). Grading on the levee fill shall be performed under the direction and concurrence of the US Bureau of Reclamation and CVWD. GEO-5 Where project soils require, they shall be overexcavated during grading to be replaced with compacted fill, as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. The proposed grading is anticipated to expose cut and fill transitions at finish grade. Shallow fill areas and cut portions of lots should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill to provide a minimum of 4 feet of uniform fill cap over each lot. Streets should be overexcavated 2 feet below subgrade to provide uniform fill below the pavement section. Alternatively, and as recommended by the Project geologist, streets may be overexcavated 2 feet below the deepest utility to reduce the amount of oversize materials encountered and facilitate utility excavation/installation. GEO-6 Rockfall hazard analysis should be performed during the design phase if structures are planned within 100 feet of these hillsides (i.e., Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide) once plans are further developed to evaluate this hazard and provide site -specific mitigation recommendations (i.e., impact walls or berms/channels), as required. GEO-7 Slopes shall be engineered for stability, including during seismic events, to reduce potential slope failure hazards, as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. GEO-8 Manufactured Slope Maintenance and Protection. To reduce the erosion and surficial slumping potential of the graded slopes, permanent manufactured Travertine Draft EIR 1-31 October 2023 63 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation slopes shall be protected from erosion by concrete lining, riprap, groundcover planting or other appropriate method (i.e., jute matting, polymer coating, etc.) as approved by the Project geologist. These measures shall be applied as soon as practicable. Drainage shall be designed and maintained to collect surface waters and direct them away from manufactured slopes and as required by the Project geologist. GEO-9 Structural setbacks, including those for retaining walls, shall be established as prescribed by the Project geotechnical engineer. GEO-10 The project proponent shall comply with the most current Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014- DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). Compliance with the CGP involves the development and implementation of a Project -specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is designed to reduce potential adverse impacts to surface water quality during the period of construction. The SWPPP may include, but is not limited to, the following BMPs: • Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: watering of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non-stormwaterManagement: clear water diversion and dewatering; and • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management. GEO-11 Expansion Potential. The expansion potential of the on -site soils is low to very low. In accordance with the Project geotechnical evaluation recommendations, Travertine Draft EIR 1-32 October 2023 64 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Level of Potential Impacts on Mitigation Measure Significance after the Environment Mitigation additional laboratory testing shall be performed following completion of grading operations to verify the expansion potential of the near -surface soils. GEO-12 A qualified professional paleontologist shall prepare a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan and a Worker's Environmental Awareness Program to train the construction crew, both to be implemented during development. 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Project may result in significant Mitigation Measure and unavoidable GHG emissions. GHG-1: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall purchase a minimum of approximately 408,720 MTCO2e credits (approximately 13,624 MTCO2e per year for 30 years). The purchase of carbon credits must be made from a CARB-approved carbon registry with independent third -party verification. Examples of approved registries include the American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Verra. The applicant shall submit documentation of the offset purchase to the City demonstrating that it Significant and mitigates a minimum of approximately 13,624 MTCO2e per year (408,720 Unavoidable MTCO2e over a 30-year period), prior to any occupancy of the site. Alternatively, the project applicant may submit a GHG reduction plan to the City for approval that achieves an equal level of GHG reduction outlined herein. The GHG plan must include enforceable actions that reduce GHG emissions to at or below the total mitigated values presented herein. GHG-2 All residences shall incorporate roof -top solar panels, in -home batteries and EV charger stations to facilitate use of EVs, golf carts and other low -speed electric vehicles (LSEVs). Travertine Draft EIR 1-33 October 2023 65 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation GHG-3 All planned single-family homes to be electric -ready and shall include electrical circuits for space heating, water heating, cooking/ovens, and clothes dryers, electrical panel, branch circuits, and transfer switch for battery storage. GHG-4 Dedicated circuits and panels in residential and commercial buildings shall be provided to easily convert from natural gas to electric in the future. GHG-5 All non-residential components of the development where vehicle parking is provides shall also provide EV chargers. GHG-6 All household and other appliances shall be of the highest energy efficiency rating, such as Energy Star, practicable at the time of purchase. GHG-7 To limit and reduce energy use associated with water consumption, all project landscaping shall be desert and other drought tolerant vegetation. The use of turf shall be kept to a minimum. GHG-9 All HVAC systems shall be Very High Efficiency HVAC (SEER 16/80% AFUE or 9 HSPF) or greater efficiency. GHG-10 All domestic hot water systems shall be Very High Efficiency Water Heater (0.92 Energy Factor) with Enhanced Solar Pre -heat System (min. 0.35 Net Solar Fraction). GHG-11 All potable water fixtures shall have EPA WaterSense Certification or greater efficiency. 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The proposed Project would result in SI Mitigation Measures related to the transport, use, or Less than disposal of hazardous materials during significant construction and operation; and sites Travertine Draft EIR 1-34 October 2023 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation listed pursuant to Government Code HAZ-1 Prior to grading, Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be required. Section 65962.5. The Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be conducted by an Environmental Professional as defined in Section 312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312. • Per Section 312.10, an Environmental Professional is an environmental consultant that has an accredited education in earth or natural science, at least five years of formal training under another environmental professional, a professional state license, and maintains expert knowledge in the environmental geology, sustainability, and engineering fields. HAZ-2 A site -specific Soils Management Plan (SMP) shall be developed by an Environmental Professional for the Project property if chemical levels exceeding regulatory thresholds are identified during the Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation. The SMP shall be implemented during excavation and grading of the Project, and describe the protocol for managing (potentially contaminated) soils and disposing of (potentially hazardous) debris, as well as guidelines for handling known and/or undocumented subsurface features if discovered. HAZ-3 All agricultural related debris, materials, and foundations shall be removed and hauled to an appropriate landfill prior to land disturbance in the previous vineyard area. If significant soil staining is found at previous storage locations, stained soil shall be excavated and disposed of in an approved landfill. HAZ-4 In compliance with the Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009- 009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ), the Project shall develop and implement a project -specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction of the project. The SWPPP shall include comprehensive handling, storage, and management procedures for building materials, especially those that are hazardous and toxic. The Travertine Draft EIR 1-35 October 2023 67 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation designation of staging areas for activities (i.e., fueling and maintaining vehicles, mixing paints, plaster, mortar, etc.), and storage of hazardous materials (i.e., paints, solvents, pesticides, fuels, oils, etc.) shall be determined in the SWPPP. Best management practices (BMPs) are required in the SWPPP that demonstrate proper material delivery and storage; material use; and spill prevention and control. The SWPPP may include, but is not limited to, the following BMPs: • Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: watering of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non -storm water Management: clear water diversion and dewatering; and • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management. Lastly, and upon project completion of construction, all hazardous materials shall be removed from the project site and a Notice of Termination (NOT) shall be filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board. HAZ-5 Prior to the development of the golf facility storage and maintenance facilities, the applicant shall provide a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the Riverside County Fire Department for review and approval, if necessary. The HMBP shall be kept up to date in a location on -site and be available for review by the Riverside County Fire Department, as needed. HAZ-6 Should any component of the proposed Project require the storage or handling of hazardous materials in quantities greater than or equal to 55 gallons of a Travertine Draft EIR 1-36 October 2023 .: 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation liquid substance, 500 pounds of a solid substance, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, it shall be required to follow the procedures established in Chapter 6.95 of the HSC, which requires any business handling and/or storing a hazardous material shall obtain a permit from the DEH and electronically submit a business plan in the Statewide Informational Management System, under the administration of the County of Riverside DEH. HAZ-7 If onsite wells are determined to be inoperable, they shall be properly capped and abandoned prior to grading activities in the existing wellsite areas. HAZ-8 The Project shall consult an asbestos inspection consultant for a comprehensive asbestos survey prior to demolition of the project site. 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality The Project may result in SI to flood Mitigation Measures flows. HWQ-1 The Operations and Maintenance (O&M) plan shall include provisions to monitor and remove sediment along the west bank to maintain the required conveyance and freeboard conditions. Other aspects of the bank maintenance Less than shall be identified based on the final design configuration of the systems. A Significant Flood Control Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual for the proposed improvements shall be prepared and submitted to CVWD for review and approval. The manual shall meet the requirements of Section 5.8.9 of the Development Design Manual. 4.11 Land Use The Project will result in LTS impacts to Mitigation Measures Less than land use and planning. None required Significant 4.12 Noise Travertine Draft EIR 1-37 October 2023 .• 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation Construction of the proposed Project Mitigation Measures would result in SI. Construction activities that generate noise and vibration are considered to be temporary, intermittent and of short duration, and the projected construction noise will be below the City's established threshold for significance. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measures have been identified to further reduce construction noise to the maximum extent feasible: N0I-1 Grading and building plans shall require project construction activities comply with the City of La Quinta Municipal Code requirements pertaining to construction noise. N0I-2 During all project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and Less than maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The Significant construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receivers nearest the project site. N0I-3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receivers nearest the project site during all project construction. N0I-4 The construction contractor shall limit construction haul truck deliveries to the hours permitted by the City of La Quinta. The contractor shall also design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise. Travertine Draft EIR 1-38 October 2023 70 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation N0I-5 Prior to water well drilling, the construction contractor shall provide a temporary 24-foot-high noise barrier capable of reducing noise during well construction activities to 80 dBA Leq or less. 4.13 Population and Housing The Project would result in LTS impacts Mitigation Measures to population and housing. None required. Less than Significant 4.14 Public Services Development of the Project would Mitigation Measures result in SI to fire services. PS-1: Travertine Fire Master Plan (FMP) was developed to analyze emergency access to the Project and determine and implement strategies at the Project site to improve RCFD and CAL Fire operations and service delivery. The FMP and Addendum FMP were required to be prepared to address adequate fire protection for the area and mitigate potentially unacceptable response times in the interior of the Project. The FMP further states that conformance to the full circulation plan is required for any additional development beyond Phase 1 of the Project. The later phases of development would include the Less than improvement of Jefferson Street, which would provide emergency access to Significant the Project. Full buildout of the Project is evaluated in the Addendum FMP. The Project applicant shall implement the safety measures established in the Travertine Fire Master Plan which include the following: • approved emergency access points; • roadway design standards for fire protection vehicles; • minimum water quantity and pressure necessary for firefighting; All developer plans showing fire system connections shall provide information on the type of fire system that is being installed for the development (e.g., wet - Travertine Draft EIR 1-39 October 2023 71 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation pipe fire sprinkler systems, deluge fire sprinkler systems and dry pipe and precaution fire systems). A fire flow of 2,375 gallons per minute for 2-hour duration at 20 psi shall be required at the Project in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection, with no portion of any lot frontage more than a maximum of 500 feet from the hydrant shall be provided. Minimum fire flow for all residential structures shall be 875 gallons per minute for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi operating pressure. Fire hydrant spacing shall be in accordance with Appendix C of the California Fire Code. Both requirements must be available prior to placing any combustible materials on the job site. The fire system plans shall be submitted to CVWD to review the complexity and type of proposed fire system. PS-2: The Addendum to the Fire Master Plan ensures adequate fire protection for the area through the following enhanced mitigation measures. • building construction standards; • emergency power facilities for the proposed booster stations; • an area of refuge; • optic -con sensors located to open gates ahead of fire engine arrival; • implementation of a community emergency response team (FEMA) programs; and • HOA/community training for CPR and AED and risk reduction programs. 4.15 Recreation The Project would result in LTS Mitigation Measures Less than impacts to recreational facilities. None Required Significant 4.16 Transportation Travertine Draft EIR 1-40 October 2023 72 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation The Project could cause conflict with an Mitigation Measures applicable transportation plan or TRA-1 Project mitigation may include a combination of a fair share of fee payments to policy, or applicable congestion the affected jurisdiction, construction of specific improvements and management plan; result in an increase reimbursement to the Project proponent to account for proponent fair share hazard due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses; or result of improvement, or a combination of these approaches. The Summary of 2040 in inadequate emergency access. Intersection Improvements (Table 4.16-26) are set forth below, are feasible The Project would result in SU impacts and will mitigate Project impacts for all three access options discussed above associated with residential VMT. to levels that are less than significant. The following improvements are recommended by the TIA: • Monroe Street at Avenue 52(#14) —Install traffic signal control; Provide separate northbound left turn lane, provide second northbound through lane. • Monroe Street at Avenue 60 (#10) — Construct traffic signal Significant and improvements for eventual reimbursement via the City of La Quinta. Unavoidable In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ SB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane ■ EB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane with right turn overlap phase ■ WB Approach: Provide 2"d through lane • Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1) — Install traffic signal control; provide second eastbound through lane. In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: EB Approach: Convert inside through lane into 2"d left turn lane. • Madison Street at Avenue 54 (#3) — Install traffic signal control; Convert eastbound de facto right turn lane into free right turn lane. Travertine Draft EIR 1-41 October 2023 73 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation • Jefferson Street atAvenue 50 (#8) —Provide second westbound through lane. (This intersection is located in both the City of La Quinta and the City of Indio. The proposed improvement is in the City of Indio.) • Jefferson Street atAvenue 54 (#6) — Install traffic signal control, convert 2nd eastbound through lane into right turn lane, provide westbound right turn overlap phasing. • Monroe Street atAvenue 58 (#11) — Install traffic signal control, provide separate northbound left turn lane, provide separate northbound right turn lane, provide separate southbound left turn lane, provide separate eastbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound left turn lane; Provide separate northbound left turn lane. In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ NB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane, add right turn overlap phase to right turn lane ■ SB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane ■ EB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane • Monroe Street at Airport Blvd (#12) — Install traffic signal control • Monroe Street atAvenue 54 (#13) — Install traffic signal control, provide separate southbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound left turn lane; provide second northbound through lane, provide second southbound through lane. • Jefferson Street atAvenue 52 (#7) — reconstruct the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes around the center island to accommodate an additional through lane in the northbound and southbound directions. • Jackson Street at Avenue 58 (#18) — Install traffic signal control (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside). Travertine Draft EIR 1-42 October 2023 74 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on the Environment Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation • Jackson Street at Airport Boulevard (#19) — Install traffic signal control. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside). • Monroe Street at Avenue 62 (#9) — Install traffic signal control, provide northbound shared left -through -right lane, provide separate eastbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound right turn lane. (This intersection is located in the City of La Quinta at the northwest corner, and in the County of Riverside at the northeast, southwest and southeast corners). In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ SB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane, add right turn overlap phase to existing right turn lane ■ EB Approach: Convert through -right lane into left -through -right lane ■ WB Approach: Provide separate left turn lane • Jackson Street at Avenue 62 (#16) — Install traffic signal control. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside.) • Jackson Street at Avenue 60 (#17) — Provide traffic signal. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside.) TRA-2: Traffic Control Plan Prior to obtaining a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit the City of La Quinta for review and approval detailed construction traffic management plans, including street closure information, detour plans, haul routes, and staging plans as necessary for any off -site work that would encroach on public right-of-way. The construction traffic management plans shall include the following elements, as appropriate: Travertine Draft EIR 1-43 October 2023 75 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation • Provisions for temporary traffic control during all construction activities adjacent to public right-of-way to improve traffic flow on public roadways (e.g., flag person); • Construction -related vehicles shall not park on surrounding public streets; • Provision of safety precautions for pedestrians and bicyclists through such measures as alternate routing and protection barriers; • Schedule construction -related deliveries to reduce travel during peak travel periods; • Obtain the required permits for truck haul routes from the County of Riverside, the City of Rancho Mirage, the City of Palm Desert, and Cathedral City prior to the issuance of any permit for the project; and • Obtain a Caltrans transportation permit for use of oversized transport vehicles on Caltrans facilities. • Outline adequate measures to ensure emergency vehicle access during all aspects of the project's construction, including, but not limited to, the use of flagmen during partial closures to streets surrounding the project site to facilitate the traffic flow until construction is complete. • Include the implementation of security measures during construction in areas that are accessible to the general public to help reduce any increased demand on law enforcement services, including fencing construction areas, providing security lighting, and providing security personnel to patrol construction sites. 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources The Project could result in SI to sites Mitigation Measures g� listed in the CRHR or Local Register, See CR-1 through CR-9 Less than Tribal Cultural Resources defined by a Significant Lead Agency. Travertine Draft EIR 1-44 October 2023 76 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Potential Impacts on Level of the Environment Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems The Project could result in SI to Mitigation Measures stormwater drainage. See HWQ-1 Less than Significant 4.19 Wildfire The Project would not substantially Mitigation Measures impair an adopted emergency None Required. Less than response plan or emergency Significant evacuation plan, resulting in LTS. Travertine Draft EIR 1-45 October 2023 77 Page intentionally blank DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 2.0 Introduction Chapter 2 Introduction 2.1 Purpose This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency under CEQA, is responsible for preparing the Draft EIR for the proposed Travertine Project. The Project will require certain discretionary approvals by the City and other governmental agencies and is subject to environmental review requirements under CEQA. This introduction is included to provide an overview of the purpose, content and format of the EIR and its relation to the City of La Quinta's planning and environmental review process for the proposed Project. This EIR is intended to inform decision -makers and the general public of the Project's potentially significant environmental impacts and identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce such impacts to below a level of significance. The La Quinta City Council will consider the information presented in the EIR in acting on the entitlements requested for the Project. If the City Council approves the Project, the Council would first be required to certify the EIR as compliant with CEQA, adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and make the required CEQA findings in support of its action. The Project property occupies approximately 855 acres and proposes the development of a mixed - use Project consisting of resort uses, residential dwellings, and open space areas. Specifically, the Project proposes 1,200 low- and medium -density dwelling units, a resort facility with up to 100 resort villas, a wellness spa, resort -related amenities, recreational uses to include a golf facility with a clubhouse and a skills course, numerous neighborhood parks, a public trail system, recreational open space and natural open space for conservation. In addition to the subject Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, other regulatory applications are also being processed by the City to allow the development of the Project. The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2017-0002); a Zone Change (ZC 2017-0002); a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004); a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2017-0008); and a Development Agreement (DA2021-0001). A brief description of the proposed entitlements is provided as followed: • General Plan Amendment: The General Plan Amendment (GPA) would (1) revise the Circulation Element Roadway Classification Map to extend Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 into the Project property, and to eliminate Madison Street from the Circulation Element Roadway Classification Map in the local area, and (2) amend the Land Use Map to reflect the new land use designations proposed in the Specific Plan Amendment. Travertine Draft EIR 2-1 October 2023 "W 2.0 INTRODUCTION • Zone Change: The Zone Change (ZC) would revise the City's Zoning Map to be consistent with the land uses proposed in the Specific Plan. • Specific Plan Amendment: The Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) will amend the previously approved 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan to the new proposed Project. • Tentative Tract Map: The Large Lot Tentative Tract Map would affect the large lot subdivision of the proposed development, including proposed equestrian/multi-use trails or the location of proposed gates, and how development components correspond with existing conditions and surrounding uses. • Development Agreement: The Development Agreement (DA) would establish special terms beneficial and mutually agreeable to both the City and the property owner to facilitate Project development and to vest the Project approvals. In addition to these entitlements from the City of La Quinta, the Applicant is also requesting additional right-of-way along Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 from the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), respectively, in order to widen and/or extend these roads into the Project property; as well as providing emergency vehicle access (EVA) extending Madison Street to the Project property. The EVA will require approval from the BOR and CVWD. The impacts associated with these off -site improvements, including the widening and extension of these roadways, are analyzed in this EIR. A Development Agreement between CVWD and the landowner will provide for the number of well sites needed to serve the site based on the needs the Project and local service area. It is anticipated that up to five wells will be required as part of the Development Agreement with CVWD. The Project proponent will acquire well sites within an identified Project "off - site utility field" located east of the Project property. Because the precise location of the wells is not yet known, the DEIR analyzes this off -site infrastructure at a programmatic level, using assumptions that apply to typical well sites located within CVWD's jurisdiction. The Project will also require action by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) to site and construct a new substation to supply electricity to this and surrounding portions of the IID service area. The new substation will also be located within the off -site utility field, but its precise location is not yet known. For these reasons, impacts associated with the substation are also addressed at a programmatic level. Further project -level environmental review will be conducted as needed for the wells and the new substation by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as CEQA responsible agencies. 2.2 Review of the Draft EIR Upon completion of the Draft EIR, the City of La Quinta filed a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and the Riverside County Clerk to begin the public review period required under CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21161). Concurrent with the NOC, this Draft EIR is being distributed to the Riverside County Clerk, as well as responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding cities, and interested parties, Travertine Draft EIR 2-2 October 2023 2.0 INTRODUCTION as well as all parties requesting a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092(b)(3). During the public review period, the Draft EIR, including the technical appendices, is available for review at the City of La Quinta Design and Development, the La Quinta Library and the La Quinta Museum. It can also be accessed and downloaded from the City's website at: https://www.laguintaca.gov/travertine The addresses for each location are provided below: City of La Quinta Planning Division 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-777-7000 Hours: Monday — Thursday 7:30 am — 5:00 pm and Friday 8:00 am — 5:00 pm. http://www.laquintaca.gov La Quinta Library 78275 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-564-4767 Hours: Monday — Thursday 10 a.m. — 7 p.m., Friday and Saturday 10 a.m. — 6 p.m., and Sunday 12 p.m. — 4 p.m. Agencies, organizations, and other interested parties who wish to comment on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period shall provide written comments to: Cheri Flores, Planning Manager Design and Development Department 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta CA 92253 Phone: 760-777-7067 Email: clflores@laguintaca.gov Upon completion of the public review period, written responses to all public comments received will be prepared and included in the Final EIR. Responses to comments will be made available for review at least 10 days prior to the public hearing(s) before the City Council, at which the certification of the EIR will be considered. Travertine Draft EIR 2-3 October 2023 81 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.3 Scope of the EIR 2,3.1 Notice of Preparation The City of La Quinta issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare an EIR for a 30-day comment period for the Travertine Project in 2018. An updated NOP was prepared in 2020 to address Project changes. The 30-day comment period for the 2020 NOP occurred between March 9, 2020 and April 8, 2020. The NOP included an evaluation of the environmental topics that will and will not be analyzed within the Draft EIR. The evaluation was prepared using Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form, in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Appendix G assesses the potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. The Travertine NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. Using the CEQA Guideline Environmental Checklist Form, it was determined in the NOP that the Project would result in no impacts to mineral resources, and therefore, mineral resources is not analyzed further in the Draft EIR. Please consult Appendix A of this Draft EIR for the analysis provided in the Notice of Preparation, and Chapter 6.0, Effects Found to have No Impact, of this EIR for further detail of mineral resources and the reason it is not further analyzed in this document. The NOP was sent to the State Clearinghouse and to all responsible and trustee agencies, utilities, and other interested parties. Issues raised by the agencies and the public in response to the NOP were considered in the preparation of the Draft EIR. The NOP and comments received are contained in Appendix A of this EIR. The City received twelve comment letters in addition to the letter received from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research stating that the 30-day review period ended and providing any comments from State agencies. Most agencies provided letters notifying receipt of the NOP. State agencies and public individuals that provided comments during the review period are listed alphabetically below. - California Department of Fish and Wildlife - Desert Sands Unified School District - Harlin Cheatwood - Imperial Irrigation District - John Perry - Mitchell Tsai on behalf of Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters - Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission - Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District - Sharon Peters - South Coast Air Quality Management District - Southern California Association of Governments - SunLine Transit Agency Travertine Draft EIR 2-4 October 2023 82 2.0 INTRODUCTION The comment letters received by Public Agencies and Area Residents are contained in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. 2.3.2 CEQA Standards for Adequacy This Draft EIR provides an evaluation of the potential environmental effects associated with the development of the approximately 855-acre Travertine Project property and associated actions described herein. This EIR was prepared in accordance with Section 15151 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which defines the standards for EIR adequacy as follows: An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision -makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure. The City of La Quinta directed the preparation of this document in fulfillment of its environmental review requirements pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000-2117,) CEQA Guidelines and the Lead Agency's local CEQA implementation requirements, all as amended. The EIR includes mitigation measures that are identified to avoid, eliminate or reduce to acceptable levels the environmental impacts associated with the development of the approximately 855-acre Project property and associated off -site facilities and improvement. This EIR has been prepared as a project level document that serves as the evaluation of the proposed Project, including the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment and subdivision maps that if approved, would allow the development of up to 1,200 residential dwelling units of varying residential product types, a resort facility with up to 100 villas, recreational uses to include a golf facility featuring a clubhouse and skills golf course, neighborhood parks, water supply and on -site and off -site drainage and utilities infrastructure, a public trail system and recreational open space, and approximately 358 acres of natural open space for conservation. The EIR also includes a programmatic analysis of the off -site utilities that may be necessary to serve later phases of development under the Specific Plan, and in particular, up to five off -site CVWD wells and an IID substation. Travertine Draft EIR 2-5 October 2023 83 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.4 Organization of the EIR This EIR has been prepared to evaluate the Travertine Project which, when implemented, will guide future development of a residential/resort community on approximately 855 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta. A comprehensive project description including exhibits and maps is presented in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. The EIR is organized into the following main chapters and sections: Chapter 1.0: Executive Summary. This chapter includes a summary of the proposed Project and a discussion of the alternatives to the Project. A brief description of the areas of controversy and issues to be resolved, and overview of potential impacts, and mitigation measures are also included in this section. Chapter 2.0: Introduction. This chapter provides an introduction and overview describing the purpose of the EIR, a brief history of the Project and the scope of the EIR. This chapter identifies the documents incorporated by reference in the EIR and where these documents can be reviewed. Finally, this chapter includes a summary of the comments received on the Notice of Preparation. Chapter 3.0: Project Description. This chapter includes a detailed description of the proposed Project, including its location, existing site conditions, Project history, and Project characteristics. A discussion of the Project objectives intended use of the EIR, responsible agencies and their roles in the environmental process, and approvals that are needed for the proposed Project are also included in this chapter. Chapter 4.0: Environmental Impact Analysis. This chapter contains a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposed Project, organized by resource area. Each resource area section includes a description of the environmental setting (the existing physical environment and the regulatory environment) for the resource area, the methodology for evaluating impacts, the thresholds of significance that are applied in the EIR to evaluate Project impacts to the resource area in question mitigation measures (in addition to environmental requirements already imposed on the Project by regulatory agencies) proposed in the EIR to reduce any potentially significant impacts that are identified in the EIR, and a finding of the level of significance after mitigation for each potentially significant impact identified in the EIR. The impact evaluation considers direct impacts, indirect impacts, and cumulative impacts. The following resource areas are addressed within Chapter 4.0. Section 4.1 — Aesthetics: Addresses visual impacts that may occur with implementation of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. Section 4.2 — Agriculture and Forestry: Addresses impacts that the proposed Project may have on lands designated as Prime (or otherwise important) Farmland or Forestlands and Timberlands; and includes an evaluation of the significance of the existing abandoned vineyard located on the Project property. Travertine Draft EIR 2-6 October 2023 84 2.0 INTRODUCTION Section 4.3 —Air Quality: Addresses the local and regional air quality impacts associated with Project implementation as well as consistency with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). This section also addresses the potential for odors to affect existing and future sensitive receptors in the vicinity. Section 4.4 — Biological Resources: Addresses the Project's potential direct and indirect impacts on habitat and wildlife in the area, summarizes all the biological resources and jurisdictional delineation studies prepared for the Project, as well as a summary of the Biological Opinion issued as a result of the Section 7 consultation completed between the Applicant, the BLM and the US Fish and Wildlife Service which predates the Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP); and evaluates potential impacts associated with the adjacency of the proposed Project to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. Section 4.5 — Cultural Resources: Addresses the impacts of Project development on historic and archaeological resources. Tribal Cultural Resources are addressed separately in Section 4.17 below. Section 4.6 — Energy Resources: Addresses the impacts of Project development on energy resources during Project construction and operation, as well as whether the Project will conflict with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Section 4.7 — Geology and Soils: Addresses the potential impacts the Project may have on or be affected by soils and assesses the effects of the Project in relation to geologic and seismic conditions, including the site's proximity to the Martinez Rockslide area and the potential for strong ground shaking. This section also addresses paleontological resources. Section 4.8 — Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Addresses the Project's estimated contribution to global climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases during construction and long-term operation of the proposed Project, and determines the Project's consistency with applicable GHG reduction policies and programs. Section 4.9 — Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Addresses the likelihood of the presence of hazardous materials or conditions on the Project property and in the Project area or the transport of hazardous materials that may have the potential to impact human health. This section also includes an analysis of the potential for the site to be impacted by wildland fires due to proximity to permanent open space associated with the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservancy area and other surrounding lands. Section 4.10 — Hydrology and Water Quality: Addresses the impacts of the Project on regional and local hydrological conditions, including drainage areas, and changes in flow rates; as well as potential impacts that may currently exist that must be addressed during Project design to prevent flooding. It also addresses issues of water quality and impacts to jurisdictional waters. This section also summarizes the requirements under the County's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, in which the City is a co-permittee, for storm water control, retention and release. Travertine Draft EIR 2-7 October 2023 85 2.0 INTRODUCTION Section 4.11 — Land Use and Planning: Addresses the related land use impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, including the Project's compatibility with surrounding existing and planned land uses, and the need for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. This section also provides an analysis of the La Quinta General Plan's goals and evaluates the Project's consistency with these goals. Finally, this section provides an analysis of the Project's relationship and consistency to the CVMSHCP and the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). Section 4.12 — Noise: Addresses the noise impacts that may occur during construction and operation of future land uses proposed as part of the Project. Section 4.13 — Population and Housing: Addresses the potential of the Project to induce direct and indirect growth related to population, housing, and employment growth. Section 4.14 — Public Services: Addresses the impacts upon public service providers including fire, police, schools, and other public services. Section 4.15 — Recreation: Addresses the potential impacts on existing parks and recreation facilities and programs due to the population increase, and evaluates the proposed Project's recreational features, including trails that would be accessible to the public. Section 4.16—Transportation: Addresses impacts on the local and regional roadway system including the extension of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62, emergency access, public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, as well as an analysis of Project impacts to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Section 4.17 — Tribal Cultural Resources: Addresses the potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources; including a summary of the City's Native American consultation with affected tribes. Section 4.18 — Utilities and Service Systems: Addresses the Project's impacts on water supply, wastewater treatment, storm drains, solid waste, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications. Section 4.19—Wildfire: Addresses the Project's impacts on emergency response and evacuation plans in areas located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Chapter 5.0: Other CEQA Required Sections. This chapter provides a summary of significant environmental impacts, including unavoidable and growth -inducing impacts, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources. This chapter also provides a summary of environmental issues where findings can be made that the Project would not cause an impact on the environment or that the impact would be negligible. Chapter 6.0: Effects Found to Have No Impact. This discussion identifies those resources area that will not be impacted bythe Project. No impacts related to mineral resources, perthe CEQA Guidelines, are summarized in this chapter. Travertine Draft EIR 2-8 October 2023 2.0 INTRODUCTION Chapter 7.0: Alternatives to the Proposed Project. This chapter compares the impacts of the proposed Project with four Project alternatives: the No Project/No Build Alternative, the No Project/Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative, the Phase A Only Alternative, and the No Project/Spa and Resort/Golf Alternative. Chapter 8.0: References. This chapter contains a full list of references that were used in the preparation of the EIR. Chapter 9.0: Acronyms Referenced. This chapter contains a full list of acronyms used throughout the EIR. Appendices. Includes all notices and other procedural documents pertinent to the preparation of the EIR, as well as all technical material prepared to support the environmental analysis. .5 Reference Documents 2.5.1 Documents Incorporated by Reference As permitted by CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, this EIR incorporates by reference several public documents and in order to provide general background information. Information from the documents, has been incorporated by reference, and the relationship between the incorporated information and the analysis in the EIR has been briefly summarized where each document is referenced in the EIR. For the documents that are not available via a website link, the City of La Quinta will make the documents available for inspection by the public at City Hall, in accordance with PRC Section 21061 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. Documents include: • La Quinta General Plan (http://www.laguintaca.gov/business/design-and-development/planning-division/2035-la-guinta-general-plan) • La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (https://laglaserweb.laguintaca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=104282&dbid=1&repo=CityofLaQuinta) • Draft Travertine Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004) (Appendix A) • Travertine and Green Specific Plan EIR, adopted 1995 (La Quinta City Hall) • Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP Website: https://cvmshcp.org/) Travertine Draft EIR 2-9 October 2023 87 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.5,2 Documents Prepared for the Project The technical studies prepared forth e proposed Project and other informational documents are listed below, with their corresponding appendices in parentheses. These documents are included in their entirety at the back of this EIR and on the City's website. Appendix A Notice of Preparation, Comments Received and SPA Appendix B.1 Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Appendix B.2 Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Updated Appendix C.1 Air Quality Impact Analysis Appendix C.2 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum Appendix D.1 Biological Resources Assessment Appendix D.2 Utility Field Biological Memo Appendix D.3 Jurisdictional Delineation Appendix D.4 Addendum to the Jurisdictional Delineation Appendix D.5 Joint Project Review Appendix E.1 Cultural Report Appendix E.2 2017 & 2006 Cultural Reports Appendix F Supplemental Energy Memo Appendix G.1 Geotechnical Evaluation Appendix G.2 Paleontological Report Appendix H Greenhouse Gas Analysis Appendix 1.1 Radius Map Report (EDR) Appendix 1.2 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix J.1 Hydrology Report Appendix J.2 Water Quality Management Plan Appendix J.3 Drainage Master Plan Appendix K Land Use Consistency Analysis Tables Appendix L.1 Noise Study Appendix L.2 Off -Site Utility Field Noise Study Appendix M.1 Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix M.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation Appendix N.1 Approved Water Supply Assessment Appendix N.2 Water Supply Assessment Verification Letter Travertine Draft EIR 2-10 October 2023 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 3.0 Project Description Chapter 3 Project Description 3.1 Introduction This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") describes the location, objectives, and characteristics of the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment ("Specific Plan Amendment") project ("Project") and the intended uses of this Draft EIR, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq. Included in this Chapter is a description of the proposed Project's technical, economic, and environmental characteristics. It should be noted that within this Draft EIR, the "Project property" is defined as the 855-acre property, while the "Project site" indicates the property, adjacent roadway, infrastructure, and drainage improvements occurring on surrounding lands. A glossary of acronyms used in this Draft EIR is provided in Chapter 8.0. 3.2 Project Location The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project property encompasses an area of approximately 855 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta. The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley in Riverside County. Exhibit 3-1, Regional Location, illustrates the City and the Project location within the larger Coachella Valley region. As shown in Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, the local area is developed with a number of golf course communities located to the north and east, and nearby geographic features including Coral Mountain to the north, the Santa Rosa Mountains to west, and the Martinez Rockslide to the south. The foothills and peaks of the Santa Rosa Mountains are part of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument and will remain as open space in perpetuity. Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, displays an aerial view of the Project site, outlining section lines, Project property boundary, adjacent roadways, and neighboring communities. Further discussion of the land uses adjacent, and in proximity to the Project, is included in the following Section 3.2.1, Surrounding Land Uses. The Travertine property comprises gently sloping terrain due to the Project property's adjacency to surrounding mountain ranges. These gentle slopes originate from the Santa Rosa Mountains which border the Coachella Valley and the Project property on the west side. The steeper areas, those with slopes greater than 20 percent, are generally located in the southern portions of the property. This is illustrated in Exhibit 3-4, Topography and Slope. The Project is located in Section 33, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, and Sections 3 through 5 in Township 7 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base Line and Meridian, Martinez Mountain and Valerie 7.5-minute quadrangles; and at Latitude 330 35' 53" N Longitude 1160 15' 33" W (approximate geographic center of the property). Travertine Draft EIR (0) 3-1 October 2023 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The 855-acre Project property consists of the following Assessor Parcel Numbers: 766-110-003, -004, -007, and -009; 766-120-001, -002, -003, -006, -015, -016, -018, -021, and -023 753-040-014, 016, and -017, 753-050-007, and -029; 753-060-003, 764-280-057 and -059, and 764-028-061. General Location of the Off -Site Utilities As shown on Exhibits 3-2 and 3-3, this Draft EIR also includes a programmatic evaluation of up to five Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) water wells and a 2.5-acre Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation that would be needed to support both the Project and anticipated growth in the City. Per the CVWD Design Manual, well sites shall be a minimum of 150 feet by 150 feet in dimension (0.50 acres), and 0.75 acres if there is an onsite detention basin system. Well sites typically include well heads and pumps, control equipment housing, block walls, gated entry, paved driveway, and well structures, approved by CVWD. A typical IID substation will range from 315 feet by 315 feet and will include lighting arresters, conductors, insulators, instrument transformers, electrical power transformers, relays, circuit breakers, bus bars, etc. In compliance with IID's site requirements (IID RGSTD-0001), the substation will also include access roads and fencing/block wall. Supporting infrastructure associated with the substation includes 16-kiloVolt (kV) distribution lines from the substation to the respective customer locations. All distribution circuits will be underground within existing rights -of -way. Transmission lines from the substation to any new substation will be aboveground. Once the new substation is established, all distribution facilities will be via underground conduit systems. These off -site facilities will have independent utility and are also analyzed at a programmatic level in this DEIR because their specific locations are not yet known. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, this utility infrastructure is proposed to be located east and northeast of the Project property, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. Currently, the off -site locations are primarily characterized by vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land. The off -site planning area has been identified in consultation with CVWD, IID and the City. Off -site roadway and intersection improvement, described in Section 4.16, Transportation, are also a part of the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 3-2 October 2023 IS fAMT- QcA V& I ty J. id 4f-Q 4P6 1 ,,,boy mr P d.M 0 1.4 J*F j.; J6w 66 y r i OF A Q a 1-till rd r La I -b ra, Al Ma 0 Source: TRG Land, Inc. J. acdk):j - -:.I :abLj '11— Uormwd r- All 99 MSACONSULTING INC REGIONAL LOCATION TRAVERPNE —�-j i. AAG ivi - ?!Jr;—'IdU PUIMQ'5:�Abdic! EXHIB 3-1 7�- 77 W4t]d IN IA 4NEEt- Ag t- 17-SF 31 L pi 147 AAN" L L41 '1' W 4r joneLkv &IbLmfdb C E, 5 t P RIDJ ECT P ROPERT -4 -- � ER Santa Rkos-a a mum ain's M d Dz A0 ism ir -dGth'D =Lhibf rbix Source: TRG Land, Inc. I + W i IL MSA CONSULTING, INC. VICINITY MAP -I .7-NN"W: m.—IW j'lJqINF.EmmCl P.,_1 A 1: ".1FIAN'll TRAVERTINE EXHIB�3-2 r ' THE QUARRY � � ���� �- ., .� CORAL --- :•f� CANYON (FUTURE) County of Riverside- ���� TRAVERTINE �� �� � r `• j + � M Martinez ` , 1�-.,.:. •Y• .. >k� Aa •..•:•.•.•t ± Rock Slide +` �. ::: 1.i�[:.=G'�'ti:k:: Sc• T r 11 W.0�4. lr i. y -4 n N 41� LEGEND 0 Section Lines' Utility Field 'The Public Land Survey System (PLSS) Section —one -square -mile block of land, containing 640 acres, or approximately 0 Section Line Numbers 0 City of La Quinta Boundary one thirty-sixth of a township. Due to the curvature of the Earth, sections may occasionally be slightly smaller than one square mile 0 Project Boundary Source: TRG Land, Inc. IIIASACONSULTING, INC. SITE LOCATION MAP TRAVERTINE ;•!Jrrl!�k.;FLJ�����Iy.�iLiLIU��i'llq',-i EXHI033-3 L L p ry I. 'k L k. I 4L N4P L 36 17 Z 16' r 'VEXV.E 62 3�7 j :r I d 19 Cb Ir b Rock lid'e AA L j.m J. C s L0__R RANGEE-G. RAN.i=s4r. SEW Etz"T CC-3= =lW.-E ;=—:F -;AN6=— U�_ 7.}Q4 z ti! IV, r-9 zu re vvi I -Q.&o 15.0 I!yp :3 L L4 *'% Source: TRG Land, Inc. MSA CON SU LTI N G. I N C. TOPOGRAPHY AND SLOPE M 7L C m M L: W. A. �li'� i;l U;lil Vik-'. TRAVERTINE ' NTS EXHIB?f 3-4 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.2.1 Surrounding Land Uses As shown in Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, and Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, the Project property encompasses approximately 855 acres, generally bounded by vacant land and Coral Mountain on the north; vacant privately -owned land to the west; Bureau of Land Management -managed land, including designated critical habitat for the Peninsular bighorn sheep, to the south; and vacant land and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Dike No. 4 with related stormwater impoundments on the east. Land uses surrounding the Project property are further described as follows (see the aerial photograph in Exhibit 3-2): Direction Table 3-1 Surrounding Land Uses Description North • Coral Mountain and Coral Mountain Park immediately north of the Project property • Lake Cahuilla County Park and Lake Cahuilla approximately one mile north • Golf course communities including Andalusia and PGA West approximately one mile north of the property East • Vacant Land owned by o Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) o Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) o Bureau of Land Management (BLM) • Private vacant lands are directly adjacent to the eastern boundary of the property • The Trilogy Golf Club at La Quinta is approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the intersection of Madison and Avenue 62 South • BLM (Martinez Slide) — Open Space/Wilderness Area and CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area West • Vacant, private lands • BLM - Open Space/Wilderness and CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area • Guadalupe Channel, owned by BLM and BOR, and managed and maintained by CVWD The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes, located off -site on the northern end of the Project property and to be crossed by the proposed Project, are also designed to convey natural flows to Dike No. 4. The groundwater percolation ponds that occur between the Project property and Dike No. 4 are presently protected from off -site drainage by a combination of earthen berms, rock lining, and concrete channelization. Travertine Draft EIR 3-7 October 2023 it 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.3 Project History The Project property lies on an alluvial fan made up of materials deposited by drainages emanating from the Santa Rosa Mountains in the southeast portion of La Quinta. As discussed above, vineyard uses are the only known land use of the property is indicated near its center. The vineyard consisted of grape vines, irrigation lines, and access roads. Toro Canyon Land Exchange In 1988-1989 the Project property was part of a proposed land exchange, referred to as the Toro Canyon Land Exchange. The Land Exchange occurred between the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Nature Conservancy to dispose of public lands that would be more suitable for development in exchange for private land further to the south that provides important habitat for bighorn sheep. An Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared in compliance with the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the land exchange, which concluded that the private land offered in the exchange would now be protected as federal resources in support of bighorn sheep and critical habitat. Additionally, as part of the land exchange, the Project site would be available for development in accordance with the land use planning designations imposed by the City of La Quinta. The exchange consisted of the following: • Five sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains, four sections owned by Travertine property owners, and one section owned by the Nature Conservancy; together comprising 3,207 acres within the Santa Rosa Mountain National Scenic Area, offered to the BLM. • One section of land owned by the BLM comprising approximately 639 acres offered to the Travertine property owners. • Upon approval of the Toro Canyon Land Exchange, the 639 acres were combined with approximately 270 acres of adjacent acres to create the Project site for a total of approximately 909 acres of developable land. Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan The County of Riverside included the Project property within its Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVCP). The ECVCP land use designation for the Project's lower elevation (the flatter portions of the property) was "Planned Residential Reserve". This designation was intended to allow for large scale, self-contained Resort/Spa communities. The steeper portions of the property were designated as "Mountainous Areas" in the ECVCP where limited land uses permitted in areas covered by this designation included Open Space, limited recreational uses, limited single family residential, landfills and resource development. Annexation to City of La Quinta Once the Toro Canyon Land Exchange was approved, the City of La Quinta began annexation proceedings with the County of Riverside for the Project property. The annexation was completed in Travertine Draft EIR 3-8 October 2023 ti• 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1993 with the Project property designated as Low Density Residential (LDR 2 to 4 dwelling units per ac [du/ac]) and Open Space (1 du/10 ac) land uses. Approval of 1995 Specific Plan The 1995 Specific Plan covered 909 acres of the Project site and proposed 2,300 dwelling units; 10 acres of commercial uses; a 500-room resort hotel with amenities; 36-hole golf course; tennis club; private recreation in individual developments; and 378 acres of Open Space uses (including two golf courses). In June 1995, the Travertine (Travertine and Green) Specific Plan was approved, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified by the La Quinta City Council by adoption of Resolutions 95-38 and 95-39, subject to conditions of approval and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Along with the Specific Plan, a corresponding General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone were also approved. The Specific Plan identified a number of zoning designations, including: • Low Density Residential — 382.2 acres, 1,526 units • Medium High Residential — 84.4 acres, 774 units • Neighborhood Commercial —10 acres • Tourist Commercial — 30.9 acres • Golf Course Open Space — 377.5 acres • Open Space — 4.1 acres • Master Planned Roadways — 20.1 acres Exhibit 3-5, 1995 Land Use, illustrates the zoning designations in the approved 1995 Specific Plan. In June 1999, the La Quinta Planning Commission re -approved the Specific Plan for the Project to allow for an extension of time by adoption of Resolution 99-061. The 1995 Specific Plan is the current land use planning document applicable to the Project property. Travertine Draft EIR 3-9 October 2023 ISM Medium Density ResidentialColiF Cou�rse ;.: 1 'i s � r r r �r t _ f f i s � A CONSULTING 11995 LAND USE �dJr: M1J� } VI.=!Jr:•���;FLJ��i'4tiCy��.l9�;1��;, TRAVERTINE EXHIBh�3-5 SUMMARY COLOR LAND USE Low Density Residential MaintenancTennis Club e 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1995 Biological Opinion Relating to Peninsular Bighorn Sheep In June 2004, a request was submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to initiate a Section 7 consultation regarding the impacts to the Peninsular bighorn sheep and its designated critical habitat. A Biological Opinion (BO) was completed by the USFWS in December 2005 that evaluated the biological resources of the 1995 Specific Plan in a Biological Assessment. The Travertine property owners had acquired several areas off -site to preserve open space habitat for the bighorn sheep in the time between the initial Specific Plan approval (1995) and the start of the Section 7 consultations (2005). The BO concluded that with additional conservation measures proposed by the Project proponent, including setbacks from habitat and vegetation requirements for areas near the southern and western property lines, the development of the site as previously approved, would not adversely affect bighorn sheep or their critical habitat. Exhibit 3-6, Conservation Area, illustrates the conservation areas and critical habitat boundary in relation to the Project property. Prior NEPA Review of the 1995 Specific Plan Implementation of the Specific Plan also required the acquisition of additional right-of-way along the proposed major roadways (Jefferson Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 62) from the BLM and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). This resulted in the need for a federal Environmental Assessment (EA No. CA-600-06-28) to be prepared and circulated under NEPA. This EA/Finding of No Significant Impact was adopted in 2007 by the BOR. Archaeological/paleontological surveys and a jurisdictional delineation were both completed as part of the EA process in addition to other special studies to evaluate the impacts of Project development. The consultations with the agencies and related documentation resulted in several recommended mitigation measures that the Project proponent was required to incorporate into the Project. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan During this time the Project proponent also worked closely with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to ensure that the proposed land uses were compatible with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), prepared pursuant to Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. CVMSHCP is also a Natural Communities Conservation Plan permitted under Fish and Game Code 2800 et seq. The USFWS and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) issued permits for the CVMSHCP in 2008. Pursuant to the CVMSHCP, development of the Project property is considered a "Covered Activity" under the permits, as long as the following measures are retained in the design of the Project (Fish and Wildlife ERIV — 2735.3): • The Specific Plan authorized disturbance must stay outside the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. • The remainder of the property within the Specific Plan area and inside the Conservation Area will be preserved and undistributed in perpetuity. Travertine Draft EIR 3-11 October 2023 ti• 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • The Project proponent committed to providing a no interest loan to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) to acquire essential bighorn sheep habitat in the Project property if needed. • The Project proponent was to provide additional fees for bighorn sheep monitoring and research. Tribal Consultation In 2007, the Project proponent authorized the completion of a Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation, including limited subsurface testing on the Project property. As part of this effort, four local Native American tribes were contacted for comment regarding their knowledge of cultural resources in the area. The Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians indicated awareness of several cultural resources in close proximityto the Project property and requested a Native American monitor be present during any ground disturbing activities. Also during 2007, a report on the status of the vineyards within the Project property was conducted. In addition, a Supplemental Cultural Resources Survey Report was prepared to evaluate the access road from the extension of Madison Street and access road from the extension of Jefferson Street. Results for both areas were negative for prehistoric and historic -era resources. As a result of all three surveys, the Specific Plan Amendment Land Use Plan and other plans (circulation, infrastructure) were designed to avoid areas that were found to have cultural and paleontological sensitivity. Hydrology The Project property is located on a bajada extending eastward from the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains toward the Eastern Coachella Valley floor. In this setting, the eastern slopes and various associated canyon drainages stemming out of the Santa Rosa Mountains occur west of the project site, while the Martinez Rockslide formation occurs to the south. To the north, the Project property is met by Coral Mountain and by the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes. To the east, the property is met by the Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility and by Dike No. 4. The said replenishment facility consists of multiple percolation ponds designed to accept water conveyed from the Colorado River, while Dike No. 4 is an earthen levee system forming part of the flood control system for the Eastern Coachella Valley. The Project setting can also be described as the lower extent of the watershed area tributary to Dike No. 4. Drainage from various canyons on the easterly front of the Santa Rosa Mountains occur along distributary flow paths and active alluvial fan conveyances to the engineered retention area on the west side of Dike No. 4. Travertine Draft EIR 3-12 October 2023 100 z L % Aah eq- 11 rF{Lr P4 0.4 M nX IF VJ %M�FFIFFMXY 3. COACHELLA VAUV M ULTEPLF- SPEC FES 14ABITAT GONSERVATFUN AREA J V C & R MCLAIL 14 �4t %QNDAKY' V1. Ira iRn wr D ma W E N SMOE Lr N r LN V "A J X'A i jm I R*j'rr -."cjr c v o ;h t• `'j rj�M . 1j" hw r lnl�r-$Wx F.Yn Lm M4 **r v I , " — '. - I . .. Source: TRG Land, Inc. MSSCONSULTINGINC. CONSERVATION AREA } LILAMPING ivi. F!Jf:-' IdU PIJIMQ'5:4Adic! Ml-ILJWl'I 14,-1 TRAVERTINE EXHldft3-61 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.4 Overview of the Proposed Project The proposed Project includes development of a mix of uses including up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types and two community parks (east and west) on 378.8 acres; a 38.3- acre resort/spa facility with a 45,000-square-foot boutique hotel with a 175-seat restaurant, 97,500 square feet of resort villas, and 8,700 square feet of spa and wellness center, as well as yoga and tennis courts; a 46.2-acre resort/golf facility with a 5,500-square-foot golf academy, a 1,000-square- foot clubhouse, and 10,000-square-foot banquet restaurant (500-seat capacity). The Project also proposes recreational open space consisting of a 5-mile public trail system, staging areas, gathering areas, and passive and active spaces on approximately 55.9 acres. Natural open space land uses are proposed to occur on approximately 301.2 acres on the southern portion of the Project property for conservation and preservation purposes. The Project also includes supporting drainage, water and wastewater and dry utility infrastructure on the Project property as well as outside the Project property that is described in greater detail in Section 3.8 (Infrastructure Plan). The Project property and immediately adjacent off -site improvements associated with the Specific Plan Amendment comprise 969 acres. (See Exhibit 4.4-3) Access to the Project includes a southerly extension of Jefferson Street through future development contemplated in the General Plan, as well as the westerly extension of Avenue 62. These roadways will extend into the Project property and create a spine roadway that will provide access to the neighborhood communities. Entries into the neighborhoods will be enhanced with roundabouts and gated access areas. Exhibit 3-7, Conceptual Land Use Plan, illustrates the locations of the proposed residential, resort, and open space land uses. Project development will also include a master planned roadway system and associated improvements, such as landscaping, discussed in detail in this Chapter. Off -Site Utility Field The off -site utility field comprises reasonably foreseeable utility infrastructure, which will have independent utility because it is needed to support both the Project and planned growth in the City. The precise location of this infrastructure is not yet known, accordingly these facilities are analyzed at a programmatic level and include a 2.5-acre Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation and up to five future Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) well sites. Please see Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, and Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, depicting the off -site utility field study area. The precise location and design of the substation and wells are subject to the review and approval of IID and CVWD, respectively. Project -level environmental review of these facilities will be undertaken as appropriate by IID and CVWD in their roles as CEQA responsible agencies. To implement the proposed Project, the Applicant is requesting City approval of several related discretionary applications: Travertine Draft EIR 3-14 October 2023 102 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Specific Plan Amendment (SP2017-0004) to amend the 1995 Specific Plan to be consistent with the current project proposal; • Zone Change (2012-0002) to revise the City's Zoning Map to be consistent with the land uses proposed in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment; • General Plan Amendment (2017-0002) o to change the General Plan Land Use Map for the Specific Plan Project area to be consistent with the land uses proposed in the Specific Plan Amendment o revise the Circulation Element Roadway Classification Map to remove Madison Street as a General Plan Roadway from south of Avenue 60 to Avenue 62, and a realignment of Jefferson Street within the boundaries of the Specific Plan; • Large Lot Tentative Tract Map (2017-0008); and • Development Agreement (DA2021-0001). In addition to these entitlements from the City of La Quinta, the Applicant is also requesting additional right-of-way along the Avenue 62 extension from the east, and the Madison EVA from the north from the BOR, in order to widen and/or extend these roads into the Project property. The Jefferson Street right-of-way on BLM land to the northwest of the Project is currently under a license agreement with the BLM, in effect until 2056. Additionally, the license agreement application for the Jefferson Street crossing of Dike No. 2 was submitted to the BOR by the City, along with the landowner of the property north of the Project property (entitled Coral Canyon). The proposed Project is discussed in greater detail below. 3.4.1 Project Objectives The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project has identified the following objectives: 1. To develop a mixed -use master planned community, to include varying housing densities and housing product types, with associated recreational amenities such as, and not limited to, trails and parkland. 2. To facilitate the attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets for new residential construction. 3. To preserve or mitigate impacts to sensitive biological resources in a manner consistent with current federal, State, and local requirements. 4. To develop a project that will generate a sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in a project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. 5. Provide for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the community and environs from flooding and hydrological hazards. Travertine Draft EIR 3-15 October 2023 103 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.4.2 Project Entitlements The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, an amendment to the 1995 Specific Plan, a large lot tentative tract map, and a development agreement as a part of the entitlement process. A detailed description of the requested entitlements is included below. General Plan Amendment The General Plan land use designations for the Project property are set out in the 1995 Specific Plan and include Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Major Community Facilities, Open Space Recreation and Open Space Natural. This is shown in Exhibit 3-8, Existing General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment will modify the adopted land use plan to include the following designations: Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Open Space Recreation, and Open Space Natural. Exhibit 3-9, Proposed General Plan, illustrates the proposed new Specific Plan land use designations. The current Major Community Facilities and General Commercial land uses will be removed via the new Specific Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment (GPA 2017-0002) has been submitted for approval concurrent with the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. GPA 2017-0002 will amend the General Plan Land Use Plan for the Specific Plan area to conform to the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment. The GPA also proposes an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element Roadway Classification Map for the removal of Madison Street as a General Plan roadway from south of Avenue 60 to 62, and the realignment of Jefferson Street within the Project property. The 12.4-acre property shown on Exhibits 3-7, 3-8, and 3-9 located within the Project property is not a part of the Project ("NAP") and will be removed from the Specific Plan. Per the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map, the NAP is designated for Low Density Residential and Open Space Recreational land uses. These uses are consistent with the existing and proposed Project land uses. Access to this NAP property shall be provided through the Project property. A consistency analysis between the General Plan and the Specific Plan Amendment has been completed and is presented in each of the relevant sections of the Draft EIR. For example, consistency with the City's Housing Element is evaluated in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, and consistency with the City's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan is evaluated in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Travertine Draft EIR 3-16 October 2023 104 N A O a L6 t NAF dp 7 4Ic r y . - o ?AVENUE S LL 1 j t� � i IA CONSULTING;, INC. CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN -:411,41No: a ^Nfi Fljr, lF: PIM : r vP � 1441� i N' - TRAVERTINE Source: TRIGLand, Inc. EXH16*3-7 Existing General Plan General Plan Designation Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 Medium /High Residential 84.4 774 Tourist Commercial 30.9 Open Space -Recreation 365.3 Open Space -Natural 12.2 Major Community Facilites 4.1 General Commercial 10.0 Master Planned Roadways 20.1 Total 909.2 2300 i •• I Martinez Rock Slide ! I • 1 Jz � : U . 1 II 1 l AVENUE 62 LEGEND Low Density Residential � Tourist Commercial � Major Community Facilities � Proposed Specific Plan Boundary Medium/High Density Residential 0 Open Space -Recreation � Existing Specific Plan Boundary _ General Commercial 0 Open Space -Natural Source: TRG Land, Inc. A• NSULTING G. i I'•i � r. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN } �L�r���lr��• } � iVl _ � ��rll ilk ° F� SIC; �.4;,,: �� Y:�.�y�=•�.,,�,,, TRAVERTINE EXHI8PI63-8 PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET L I NAP LOOP STREET ; EAST �II 1 I 1 LOOP STREET WEST AVENUE 62 rk i } � Martinez Rock Slide I IMSA-CONSULTING. Proposed General Plan General Plan Designation Acres Units Low Density Residential 318.0 758 Medium/ High Residential 60.8 442 Tourist Commercial 84.5 Open Space -Recreation 55.9 Open Space -Natural 301.2 Major Community Facilites General Commercial Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Tota I 855.4 1200 LEGEND 0 Low Density Residential 0 Open Space - Recreation 0 Proposed Specific Plan Boundary 0 Medium / High Density Residential 0 Open Space - Natural 0 Tourist Commercial Source: TRG Land, Inc. INC. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN f�5laJit;FLJjc;TRAVERTINE iL7?:�.19�a.i�l,{•,I EXH1P73-9 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Zoning Code Existing zoning for the Project property is shown in Exhibit 3-10, Existing Zoning. A Zone Change Application (ZC 2017-002) has been submitted for approval concurrent with the proposed General Plan Amendment. Proposed zoning designations for the property are shown in Exhibit 3-11, Proposed Zoning. The approved 1995 Specific Plan became the zoning for the Project property. Existing zoning for the site is shown in Exhibit 3-10, Existing Zoning. The existing zoning in the project area includes: Low Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Golf Course and Open Space. A Zone Change Application (ZC 2017-002) has been submitted for approval concurrent with the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment will modify the zoning to include the following designations: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space. Specific Plan Amendment The Specific Plan Amendment is being processed to update the uses proposed compared to those previously approved in the 1995 Specific Plan. Since the original Specific Plan was approved, changes in market conditions and other factors have led the Applicant to redesign the Project. Table 3-2,1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan, and Table 3-3, 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Specific Plan Elements, show the difference between the previously approved Specific Plan and the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. Implementation of the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment would reduce the size of the golf course from 36 holes to a golf training facility featuring a clubhouse and a skills course, remove the tennis club, modify land use configurations, and replace the Resort/Spa hotel with 500 rooms to 100 resort villa rooms, including a clubhouse restaurant and banquet facility. These uses are summarized in Table 3-2. The proposed uses are distributed among 20 Planning Areas as shown in Table 3-3. Travertine Draft EIR 3-20 October 2023 108 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Table 3-2 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Land Use Plan Specific Plan Element Approved Specific Plan Proposed Specific Plan Acreage 909 855 Dwelling Units 2,300 1,200 10 acres of commercial uses Resort 500 room resort/hotel with amenities 100 Room Resort and Wellness Spa Golf Training and Practice Facility Golf facilities 36-Hole Golf Course with associated Recreational and Commercial Elements Tennis Club Tennis Club Tennis Club removed Private Recreation in Individual Private Recreation in Individual Private Recreation Developments Developments 365.3 acres of Recreational Open 55.9 acres of Recreational Open Other Open Space Space including two Golf Courses; Space; 301.2 acres of Natural Open 12.2 acres of Natural Open Space Space Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, February 2022. As indicated in the table above, the Project proposes a reduction in Specific Plan acreage, from 909 acres to 855 acres. In 1995 an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Specific Plan, which analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the development of the 1995 Specific Plan. The 1995 EIR was prepared as a "programmatic" EIR and required additional technical reports to be completed and mitigation measures implemented prior to or concurrent with the development of the 1995 Specific Plan. As shown in Table 3-3, 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Specific Plan Elements, the Project would result in the development of fewer units as well as in a mix of uses that are less dense than authorized under the approved Specific Plan. The Project would also remove the commercial component and increase the natural open space uses for conservation relative to the approved Specific Plan. Exhibit 3-5, 1995 Zoning Plan, and Exhibit 3-7, Conceptual Land Use Plan, compares the two plans. Travertine Draft EIR 3-21 October 2023 109 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Table 3-3 Approved and Proposed Specific Plan Elements Approved Specific Plan Project Proposed Specific Plan PA Land Use Acres Density du/ac Target Units PA Land Use Acres TargetTarget Density du/ac Units RE-1 Very Low Density Residential 17.7 2.0 35 1 Resort / Spa 38.3 100 (villas) RE-2 Very Low Density Residential 72.9 2.0 149 2 Medium Density Residential 25.9 7.9 205 RR-1 Medium Density Residential 57.1 4.6 264 3 Low Density Residential 29.4 2.9 85 RR-2 Medium Density Residential 66.7 4.6 307 4 Low Density Residential 9.6 2.8 27 RR-3 Medium Density Residential 46.1 4.6 214 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 1.9 31 RR-4 Medium Density Residential 65.1 4.6 299 6 Medium Density Residential 20.1 8.1 163 RR-5 Medium Density Residential 56.6 4.6 258 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 3.3 61 VR-1 Medium High Density Residential 13.3 9.1 121 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 4.3 73 VR-2 Medium High Density Residential 71.1 9.2 653 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 5.0 74 GC-n Golf Course (North) 187.8 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 2.9 75 GC-s Golf Course (South) 189.7 11 Resort / Golf 46.2 MN-1 Maintenance 3.2 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 2.0 107 MN-2 Maintenance 0.9 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 1.8 48 TC Tennis Club 3.7 14 Low Density Residential 39.6 1.7 65 R/H Resort / Hotel 27.2 15 Low Density Residential 33.3 2.1 70 C Commercial 10.0 16 Low Density Residential 50.4 2.3 116 Jefferson Street ROW 20.1 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 21 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Totals 909.2 ac 2,300 du Totals 855.4 ac 1,200 du 100 villas Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, Land Use Plan, February 2022. Travertine Draft EIR 3-22 October 2023 110 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION As stated above, the Specific Plan Amendment allows a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units to be constructed within the Project property. Because the proposed Specific Plan has been designed to be flexible based on market conditions, if Planning Areas 1 and/or 11 are not developed with resort uses, they may be developed with dwelling units. However, the maximum number of permitted dwelling units will remain at 1,200. Transfer of dwelling units between Planning Areas may occur according to the provisions set forth in Travertine Specific Plan Amendment. The maximum number of units allowed in Travertine Specific Plan will not be exceeded without a formal amendment to the Specific Plan and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council, per the requirements of the Section 5, Implementation Measures and Administration in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment. Table 3-4, Travertine Land Use Plan Summary, displays the general land uses, number of acres to be developed for each type of use and the percent of the Project property to be developed for each land use. Table 3-4 Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Land Use Plan Summary Land Use Acres Percent of Project Residential 378.8 44.3% Resort/Golf and Banquet Facilities 84.5 9.9% Master Planned Roadways 35.0 4.1% Open Space Uses 357.1 41.7% Total 855.4 100% Development Standards and Design Guidelines The Travertine Specific Plan Amendment will act as the document governing the development standards and design guidelines proposed for each of the Project's Planning Areas. The development intent, permitted uses, and development standards for the Project are outlined in the Specific Plan Amendment. The development standards detail permitted uses, lot sizes, building and structure heights, building setbacks, front and rear setbacks, building floor areas, parking, and wall heights for each Planning Area. The design guidelines outlined in the Specific Plan Amendment are established to assist the developer of the Project property to execute a built environment that supports the Project's objectives and theme. The design guidelines establish the design vision, proposed materials, massing and scale, architecture, outdoor spaces, and parking for each Planning Area. Landscape The primary purpose of the design guidelines for landscape architecture is to ensure that landscape treatments and materials utilized in Travertine will complement the physical design and architectural features in the community in a consistent manner throughout the build -out of the community. The landscape elements are planned to accent entrances and soften hard surfaces and structures. Landscape materials and elements selected should utilize minimal amounts of water and should be appropriate for the climate of the area which includes hot, dry summers, and moderate winters. All Travertine Draft EIR 3-23 October 2023 111 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION landscape materials outlined in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment are in compliance with CVWD standards. The experience of both arriving and leaving the Project property from the northwest extension of Jefferson Street will be enhanced by the abundance of open space between the Guadalupe Dike and the Resort/Spa land use. The area between the Dike and Resort/Spa is owned by the BOR (north) and BLM (west) and will remain permanent open space. Proximity to the open space will heighten the exclusivity and the feeling of protection provided by this project feature. Generous setbacks will be provided along Jefferson Street and the edges of development. All landscape plans will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Cirri iintinn The Project property will be served by two access points: (1) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial west of Monroe Street, and (2) Jefferson Street at the northwest property corner. Internal vehicular circulation will be accessed from the proposed central spine roadway, with local loop collector roads emanating from the spine roadway via roundabouts to provide access to the neighborhoods. Additionally, an all-weather access road will be installed along the western edge of the development for access to Section 5, and a road will be developed to provide vehicular access to the 12.4-acre parcel that is not a part (NAP) of the Project property. Project -related development will not occur on the NAP parcel, which is located between Planning Area 1 and 2. To meet fire safety requirements, prior to the issuance of the very first Certificate of Occupancy, an emergency -only vehicle access (EVA) will be constructed within the Madison Street right-of-way to extend from its current terminus into the southerly half of the Project property. This will provide the two access points required for emergency response. Proposed Project circulation is discussed in greater detail in Section 3.8, Circulation, in this Chapter. Exhibit 3-14, Circulation Plan, illustrates the proposed Project circulation. Tentative Tract Map Tentative Tract Map 37387 (TTM) subdivides the Project property into large lots for future development, generally with each of its lots being contiguous with a proposed Planning Area or other infrastructure improvement. The map will also define the main roadway and infrastructure corridors for the overall Project property, and will facilitate the timing and improvement of land and facilities that will be needed to support the future residential and commercial uses. The map does not propose any residential or commercial uses. In order to develop/build the residential and commercial uses, more precise maps will be processed subsequently that will define individual home sites, local open spaces and internal streets that will implement the fine details of the Specific Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 3-24 October 2023 112 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Development Agreement The Development Agreement would vest the applicant's right to develop the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment area pursuant to the entitlements described above, as well as ensure the timely completion of infrastructure to serve the project and surrounding area, and ensure that the Project design features are enforceable by the City as Project requirements. Travertine Draft EIR 3-25 October 2023 113 Existing Zoning Plan Zoning Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 Medium Density Residential Medium / High Residential 84.4 774 Neighborhood Commercial 10.0 Tourist Commercial 30.9 Golf Course 377.5 Open Space 4.1 Master Planned Roadways 1 20.1 Total 1 909.2 2300 F tNAjPjjL.. I � 1"W rr , , -i, r i Martinez . Rock Slide I , I EGEND RL Low Density Residential _ Tourist Commercial Proposed Specific Plan Boundary RMH Medium High Density Residential _ Golf Course � Existing Specific Plan Boundary CN Neighborhood Commercial _ Open Space Source: TRG Land, Inc. M SA r4SULTI1,1111I INC,EXISITING ZONING }-u L--6 H1N1;-}zNf_ Fa15ll'd ,EP!JiCj �:wltiti L'NI.IU,�re-en{;1 TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT 1 1 43-10 PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET I -F LOOP STREET - I } Martinez Rock Slide - Proposed Zoning Plan Zoning Acres Units Low Density Residential 318.0 758 Medium Density Residential 60.8 442 Medium / High Residential Neighborhood Commercial - Tourist Commercial 84.5 Golf Course Open Space 357.1 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Tota 1 855.4 1200 -ET IL ! AVENUE 62 LEGEND RL Low Density Residential Open Space 0 Proposed Specific Plan Boundary MDR I Medium Density Residential FM Tourist Commercial Source: TRG Land, Inc. NISA-CONSULTING, INC. PROPOSED ZONING TRAVERTINE EXHIBIYII:�•11 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.4.2 Project Components The build -out components include: • 1,200 Dwelling Units of varying types 0 758 Low Density Units and 442 Medium Density Units (*unit numbers are approximate as the Specific Plan will allow limited adjustment of units between Planning Areas so long as the maximum unit count of 1,200 is not exceeded) o Estate Homes, Single Family Luxury Homes, Single Family Mid Homes, Single Family Entry Homes, Patio Homes, Single Family Attached Units • Resort/Spa facility 0 45,000-square-foot resort facility (registration, concierge, shops, fitness center, event space, and 175-seat restaurant) 0 97,500-square-foot resort villas (100 keys) 0 8,700-square-foot spa and wellness center with yoga, tennis, walking and hiking trails • Tourist serving recreational facilities and amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, tennis, yoga, etc. • Golf training facility, 4-hole golf training facility, and private golf training academy (5,500 square feet) • 1,000-square-foot clubhouse • 10,000-square-foot banquet facility restaurant • Bike lanes throughout community, including Class II bike lanes located along both sides of Jefferson Street • Pedestrian walkways and an intra-community trail — a network of trails suitable for pedestrian use planned throughout the community. • Recreational Open Space uses, including picnic tables, barbeques, golf practice facilities, staging facilities for the public regional interpretive trail. • Two community centers (approximately 4.7 and 8.8 acres) for residents, local open space, and pocket parks within tracts. The individual home builder will determine the amount of park and the level of improvements for the sub association for each neighborhood at the appropriate time. • One public trail staging area located to the south of the Avenue 62 extension with parking. • An approximately 5-mile Community Grand Loop Trail will be located along the outer perimeter of the proposed developed area of the Project, providing an additional buffer between the trail edge and the adjacent natural open space (see Exhibit 3-13, Recreation Plan). o This trail system will incorporate educational elements highlighting native desert ecology and floral and faunal species, including Peninsular bighorn sheep. Travertine Draft EIR 3-28 October 2023 116 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION o The Grand Loop Trail may from, time to time, be declared temporarily closed due to heightened public safety concerns, with entry restricted or prohibited. Public safety conditions may include, but are not limited to, wet conditions, natural debris, or seasonal closure. • Perimeter flood protection barrier along the western and southern boundaries to manage alluvial fan flows. The barrier will consist of a raised edge condition with a slope lining to protect against scour and erosion (see Exhibit 3-24, Flood Conveyances West and South Edges) o The final design of the west and south embankments will incorporate scour analysis to establish the appropriate toe -down protection. o The south embankment is subject to flows from the Middle Canyons and Rock Avalanche Canyon. The embankment is proposed to be roughly parallel to the direction of flow and will be designed as a standard channel bank. The top of embankment will provide a minimum of 3 feet of freeboard above the controlling 100-year storm event. o Maintenance road at the toe of the western embankment will be stabilized with polymer/gravel/decomposed granite or engineered proof. • The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes are proposed to be improved as a part of the project to convey new increased flow rates with freeboard and scour protection as required by CVWD, and in accordance with Federal standards for levee certification. • Onsite Basins: Stormwater will be conveyed down the Project site gradient and into two primary surface basins (Basin A and Basin B) located at the east -end of the Project site. o The total basin volume is 50.7 ac-ft. o The on -site storm flow volume difference between the pre- and post- development conditions (32.6 ac-ft) will be retained and infiltrated in the two basins. This volume in turn sets the top of the outlet risers at an elevation of 2.7 feet above basin bottom. The basin is a total of 6 feet deep. The max depth of ponding for the 100-year event was set at 4 feet to allow for 1-foot of flow over the emergency spillway plus 1-foot of freeboard. Flows will outlet through 6-42-foot risers, 3 per basin, and then continue through a 66-inch reinforced concrete pipe in Avenue 62, outletting behind Dike No. 4. • Three water booster stations. One facility located on Avenue 62 and Monroe, and the second and third to be located within the Project property. • Two onsite CVWD water reservoirs o Located in Planning Area 20 • Sewer connection will extend from the Monroe Street and Avenue 62 intersection. o The proposed onsite facilities are comprised of a series of eight -inch sewer lines serving the individual developments and flowing by gravity into the main sewer line located within Jefferson Street/spine road alignment. Travertine Draft EIR 3-29 October 2023 117 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION o Main sewer lines will range from 8 inches to 15 inches. • Master Planned Roadway system o Southerly extension of Jefferson Street, crossing the Guadalupe Canal. o Westerly extension of Avenue 62, to cross over Dike No. 4. o The proposed extensions of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 will connect onsite and create a spine roadway system for the Project. o Internal loop collector roads (Loop East and Loop West) will emanate from the spine roadway via two roundabout intersections, providing access to the proposed residential communities and Section 5. o Emergency vehicle access (EVA) will be provided by a southerly extension access within the (former) Madison Street right-of-way • Off -Site Utility Field o The off -site utility field located within a 2-mile radius of the Project property boundary will include: o Up to Five CVWD Well Sites and o An IID substation ■ 16-kiloVolt (kV) distribution lines from the substation to the respective customer locations will be underground within existing rights -of -way. ■ Transmission lines from the substation to any new substation will be aboveground. Once the new substation is established, all distribution facilities will be via underground conduit systems. 3.5 Project Design Features The following Project Design Features (PDFs) will be included in and made enforceable through a City - adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. PDF AES-1: All construction equipment will be stored onsite within a designated area that is fenced with opaque construction fencing in order to reduce temporary visual impacts. Construction waste will be stored in an area that is accessible to weekly refuse pick up. All construction waste will be taken to a recycling center. PDF AQ-1: To reduce water demands and associated energy use, subsequent development proposals within the Project property would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor and outdoor water usage, consistent with the current CalGreen Building Code performance standards for residential and non-residential land uses, achieved in part through the schedule of plumbing fixtures and fixture fittings that will reduce indoor use and efficient irrigation systems for outdoor use. Travertine Draft EIR 3-30 October 2023 118 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PDF AQ-2: In order to reduce the amount of waste disposed at landfills, the Project would be required to implement a 50% waste diversion as required by AB 939. PDF ENR-1: The Project shall, consistent with the Specific Plan Amendment incorporate complementary land uses near one another in order to decrease VMTs since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport. PDF ENR-2: The Project property includes sidewalk connections, trail networks (i.e., strolling trails, Community Grand Loop trail, and interconnector trails), and a Class II bike path. The sidewalk connections, trails, and bike paths would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. PDF ENR-3: The Project will be required to implement Title 24's Residential Mandatory Measures and Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20) in effect at the time of construction, which require the installation of solar photovoltaic systems to newly constructed, low- rise residential buildings, high efficiency lighting, and application of energy efficient design building shells and building components, such as windows, roof systems, electrical lighting systems, and heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems. PDC ENR-4: The Project will install water -efficient plumbing fixtures and irrigation systems, LED technology, and drought -tolerant plants in landscaping. PDF GHG-1: The Project will consider the solar orientation of buildings to reduce impact of the development with natural environment. PDF GHG-2: The Project will implement passive and active solar systems to take advantage and consider the year -around abundant sunshine. PDF HWQ-1: The Grand Loop Trail may from, time to time, be declared temporarily closed due to heightened public safety concerns, with entry restricted or prohibited. Public safety conditions may include, but are not limited to, wet conditions, natural debris, or seasonal closure. PDF LU-1: Consistent with the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the Project will offer a variety of housing and recreational amenities. The housing sizes and styles will be designed to meet the needs of all age groups. The recreational amenities will include a 5-mile-long public trail that will be developed around the perimeter of the Project property; a central private spine trail that bisects the residential areas of the property; on -street bike paths; preservation of natural open space; additional private parks located within the development area; a skills golf course and golf academy; and a resort and spa with restaurants, shops and activities. Travertine Draft EIR 3-31 October 2023 119 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PDF PS-1: The Project and residential areas shall be gated, with the intention of increasing community security and minimizing potential crimes, and consistent with standard operations of resort communities, the proposed resort will incorporate private security services to maximize security of the overall Project. Additionally, lighting features throughout the Project will enhance security and maximize visibility within the Project streets, intersections, and other crosswalks. PDF PS-2: All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows will be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code Appendix B and Appendix C in effect at the time of development. PDF TR-1: The project will implement marketing strategies to optimize interaction between on -site resort and residential uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip reduction strategies. Marketing strategies will include: • Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities • Event promotions • Publications PDF TR-2: The Project property includes sidewalk connections and would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. 3.6 Project Planning Areas As discussed above, implementation of the Project property will result in the development of a variety of land uses, as established in the Specific Plan Amendment. Residential land uses will range from low density to medium density and occupy 14 planning areas and approximately 378.8 acres; Resort/Spa and Resort Golf facilities will occupy Planning Areas 1 and 11, and approximately 84.5 acres of the Project property; Open Space land uses will occupy Planning Areas 17 through 20 and approximately 357.1 acres of the property; and master planned roadways will occupy 35 acres of the property. The Planning Areas (PA), their acres and targeted units are indicated in Table 3-3, Approved and Proposed Specific Plan Elements (above). 3.6.1 Residential Planning Areas Residential areas account for approximately 378.8 acres or 44.2 percent of the Project property's total land area. The Project property proposes a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units based on range of lot sizes. Residential planning areas would vary in density from 1.5 du/ac to 8.5 du/ac, resulting in an overall average density of 1.4 du/gross acres for the Project property. Per Table 3-4, Planning Areas 2 through 10, and 12 through 16. Travertine Draft EIR 3-32 October 2023 120 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION In conformance with project goals, several housing styles are proposed that comply with the maximum density for each planning area. Residential product types would vary to meet market demand but are anticipated to include the following: • Estate Homes • Single Family Luxury Homes • Single Family Large Homes • Single Family Mid Homes • Patio Homes Small Lot • Single Family Attached Units Some flexibility is built into the development regulations in order for the Project to respond to evolving market conditions. Table 3-4 describes the allowable density ranges of all Planning Areas. This provision allows for adjustments and refinements in acreage and subsequent dwelling units counts in response to changing market conditions and final design review without the need to amend the specific plan. Section 5, Implementation Measures and Administration, in the Specific Plan Amendment explains this procedure. Though some flexibility and adjustments are provided for, the maximum number of total dwelling units for the entire specific plan (1,200) will not be exceeded in the implementation of the Specific Plan. Transfer of Dwelling Units may occur according to the provisions provided in Section 5 of the Specific Plan Amendment. Low Density Residential Planning Areas 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12 through 16 would each have an allowable maximum overall density of 4.5 du/ac. Based on the target density for each residential planning area the proposed Project would include a target of 758 residential dwelling units. The Low Density Residential category will be characterized by larger single family residential lots (5,500-square-foot minimum to 9,000 square foot minimum) with the opportunity for custom homes. These homes will have the largest setbacks in the development. Permitted Uses The City of La Quinta's Official Zoning Map is proposed to be modified to correspond with the land use areas and designations reflected in the Specific Plan Amendment (see Table 3-3). Permitted uses in the Low Density Residential areas of the Specific Plan will conform to those listed in the City of La Quinta's Municipal Code Chapter 9.40, Residential Permitted Uses (Section 9.40.030). Mobile home subdivisions and manufactured homes on individual lots are subject to Section 9.60.180. To the degree there are conflicts between the Specific Plan and the zoning code, the Specific Plan governs. Medium Density Residential Travertine Draft EIR 3-33 October 2023 121 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Medium Density Residential land use reflects the transition between residential housing and open space development, and the resort/spa development. Planning Areas 2, 6 and 9 would have maximum overall density of 8.5 du/ac. Based on the target density for each residential planning area the proposed Project property would include 442 medium density (4.5-8.5 du/ac) residential dwelling units. The Medium Density Residential planning areas are intended to provide medium density, single-family residential products on lots ranging from 4,000 square foot minimum to 5,000 square foot minimum in size. Permitted Uses The City of La Quinta's Official Zoning Map is proposed to be modified to correspond with the land use areas and designations reflected in the Specific Plan Amendment (see Table 3-3). Permitted uses in the Medium Density Residential areas of the Specific Plan will conform to those listed in the City of La Quinta's Municipal Code Chapter 9.40, Residential Permitted Uses (Section 9.40.030). Mobile home subdivisions and manufactured homes on individual lots are subject to Section 9.60.180. To the degree there are conflicts between the Specific Plan and the zoning code, the Specific Plan governs. 3.6.2 Tourist Serving (Resort) Planning Areas A luxury resort and wellness spa are planned for an approximately 38.3-acre site located at the northwest entrance to the Project property from Jefferson Street, identified as Planning Area 1. Planning Area 1 is also anticipated to provide 100 guest villas. A golf academy and training facility is proposed on approximately 46.2 acres in Planning Area 11. Planning Area 11 will also include a banquet facility and golf clubhouse. These areas will consist of resort related amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, yoga, 4-hole golf training course, walking and hiking trails. The Specific Plan would also allow a portion of the maximum 1,200 residential units to be developed within Planning Area 11, if they are developed as either townhome and/or multi -family dwelling units. Table 3-5 indicates the proposed uses and amenities for the tourist serving recreational planning areas. Table 3-5 Proposed Uses and Amenities for Resort Planning Areas Planning Area Land Use Proposed Use Estimated Indoor Area (Square Feet) 1 Resort/Spa Resort Facility (Registration, concierge, shops, fitness center, event space, and 175-seat restaurant) 45,000 1 Resort/Spa Resort Villas 97,500 1 Resort/Spa Spa and Wellness 8,700 11 Resort/Golf Banquet Facility Restaurant (500-seat capacity) 10,000 11 Resort/Golf Golf Clubhouse 1,000 11 Resort/Golf Golf Academy 5,500 Travertine Draft EIR 3-34 October 2023 122 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Per the Specific Plan Amendment, the Project would allow fractional ownership/time-share development in the recreation/visitor-serving commercial zone. Approval of fractional ownership would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Planning Area 1 is located in the northern portion of the Project property and Planning Area 11 is located in the southern portion of the property. Site Development Permits, as well as building permits for any structures associated with the hotel, hospitality, and guest villas will be submitted as needed by the future developers of the resort planned areas including Fractional Ownership options. Permitted uses in Planning Area 1 and 11 will conform with those listed in Chapter 9.80 of the Municipal Code, Nonresidential Permitted Uses (Tourist Commercial), except as modified in the Specific Plan. 3.6.3 Open Space Planning Areas Open Space Recreation Open Space Recreational areas include Planning Areas 17, 18, and 19, and encompass a total of 55.9 acres of the approximately 855-acre site. Designed to offer both passive and active oriented recreational opportunities, areas planned for Open Space Recreation include picnic tables, barbeques, golf facilities, a tot lot playground, and staging facilities for the regional interpretive trail. Trails have been provided throughout the community to allow homeowners to access the various neighborhood parks and open space features. Exhibit 3-12, Recreation Plan, displays areas designated as Open Space, as well as the proposed recreational trails. Permitted uses in Planning Areas 17, 18, and 19 will conform with those listed in Chapter 9.120 of the Municipal Code, Special Purpose Permitted Uses, except as modified in the Specific Plan. Open Space Natural Open Space Natural areas include Planning Area 20 and encompass approximately 301.2 acres. The only uses that will be allowed in this area are trails, utilities, and infrastructure such as reservoir and reservoir access roads due to various environmental constraints including biological, geological, and cultural resources. Access to the proposed reservoirs will be provided from the Project property's internal loop road, into Planning Area 20 Open Space/Natural area and development of this area will be limited to the project's water tanks and related infrastructure. Public access will be limited to the 5-mile Community Grand Loop Trail that circumnavigates the development. This Trail will provide an additional buffer between the trail edge and the adjacent natural open space area. Wnfnr Tankc In order to provide the site with adequate domestic water and water pressure, the Project proposes the development of two CVWD water tanks, in Planning Area 20. The two water tanks with a storage capacity of 600,000 gallons and 2,650,000 gallons, identified as the "upper" and "lower" tanks Travertine Draft EIR 3-35 October 2023 123 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (respectively), will be situated west of the Martinez Rockslide. These water reservoirs and associated booster stations are proposed to convey well water and store it at elevations that provide required water pressure to service the Project property. The upper tank would be located at an elevation of 425 feet, while the lower tank would be located at an elevation of 335 feet. See Section 3.9.1, Water, of this Chapter for further discussion of the proposed water tanks. The Conceptual Land Use Plan (Exhibit 3-7) was developed with consideration of the environmental constraints associated with the surrounding land, including adjacency to the Santa Rosa Mountains and Martinez Rockslide area to the south, Coral Mountain to the north, and the CVWD spreading grounds to the east and northeast. Exhibit 3-7 also shows the proposed land use locations. Permitted Uses • Trails • Two water reservoirs, service roadway, underground pipelines, and ancillary facilities as allowed through consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, all other permanent structures will be prohibited in the Open Space/Natural area. • There will be an access road provided to connect off -site properties in Section 5, to the loop road of the project. This will be defined by an easement and entitled by the Applicant to allow access to and from the future project to Section 5. • All other uses will be prohibited in this area. Travertine Draft EIR 3-36 October 2023 124 l� y:l '.. h=~• '•, �-�';.�f .'f h 5,1 'fir- � ,. --�... BOO HOFF TRAIL PROPOSED JEFFERSON— I f t STREET —{ •� f , I 4 5 5 T r I 1 r 1 _ � 1 LOOP STREET ............. '1; — EAST ' 3. � 4J♦i ' � rl 1 I I r � ~ ♦ 4� � �. j ft LOOP STREET �• _ a l �. rr �'1I COMMUNITY � ' - PARK WESTf`� I 1 0 Boo Hoff Trail 0 Community Grand Loop Trail Strolling Trail Source: TRG Land, Inc. �- -- _ j � 1 r COMMUNITY PARK EAST ,---------------- . AVENUE 62 ♦ �� 'n" I --------------- Martinez Rock Slide L . 0 Interconnector Trail Class II Bike Trail 0 Open Space / Recreational 0 Open Space / Natural 0 Community Parks 0 Trailhead ,A CONSULTING I RECREATION PLAN } �I�tJN'N� } iVl. ,=!Jr;.I1dFl:J4Q ti55Ly1�.19' oi'I�{;, TRAVERTINE EXHI021- 12 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.7 Project Construction 3.7.1 Grading Phases Project grading will occur in two phases, Phases A and B. Grading Phase A will grade the southern half of the Project property's development footprint, improve and extend Avenue 62, and provide an emergency vehicle access (EVA) route to connect to Madison Street. Phase B grading will grade the northern half of the Project property's development footprint and extend Jefferson Street to a point of connection. This is illustrated in Exhibit 3-13, Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing. The anticipated length of Grading Phases A and B is approximately 2 years each. Grading phases are likely to overlap by between 6 months to a year resulting in the completion of grading to last approximately 3 years. Supporting construction roads, access roads, and infrastructure will occur within the current footprint of the Project and defined at the time of final map. Based on email correspondence with CVWD and the applicant on September 22, 2022, water during grading and construction will be provided by CVWD from an existing hydrant supplying canal water located within the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Ponds. Phase A is anticipated to grade approximately 5,500,000 cubic yards (cy) and would result in the use of 506.4 AF of water. Phase B will grade approximately 5,900,000 cy and would require 543.2 AF of water. Construction water availability limits the amount of grading and construction that could occur at the Project property at one time. 3.7.2 Construction Phasing Construction is defined as the construction of buildings (homes, resort, recreational facilities, etc.). Construction of the Project property will occur in four phases: 1A, 1B, 2 and 3. Construction Phase 1A includes approximately 534.9 acres of the Project property, resulting in the construction of 339 low density residential units on 164.4 acres, the resort/golf training facility and related facilities on 46.2 acres, and approximately 23.1 acres of open space recreation. The 301.2 acres of open space natural uses is located within Construction Phase 1A, however, no development will occur in this area, apart from the two water tanks (discussed above and in Section 3.9.1 in this Chapter). Phase 113 will develop 93.7 acres of the Project property, consisting of 191 low density residential units on 64.2 acres, 74 medium density residential units on 14.8 acres, and open space recreational uses on 14.7 acres. Construction Phase 2 will develop 80.1 acres of land consisting of 60 acres of low -density residential uses, and 20.1 acres of medium density residential uses. Phase 2 will develop 145 low density residential units and 163 medium density residential units. Finally, Construction Phase 3 will develop the remaining 292 dwelling units (87 low density residential and 205 medium density residential) on approximately 55.3 acres of the Project property, the resort/spa on 38.3 acres, and approximately 18.1 acres of open space recreational uses. Construction of Phases 2 and 3 will proceed sequentially. Travertine Draft EIR 3-38 October 2023 126 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION As discussed above, construction water availability limits the amount of grading and construction that can occur concurrently onsite. The Project phases informed the assumptions in the air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), noise, and traffic analyses by evaluating the Project's impact during each developmental phase of the site (both grading and construction). The phasing was utilized in the technical modeling to determine the Project's impact compared to existing conditions in the Project property and vicinity. This also analyzes the increases of air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and traffic during buildout of the Project. The construction, installation, and/or extension of infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve each phase of development shall be operational prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy or Final Inspection for that particular phase. Perimeter streets, two points of access and associated landscaping (i.e., the extension of Avenue 62 and the Madison EVA) will be required to be constructed and installed prior to construction and drop of lumber. As development in Travertine and the surrounding community continues, market conditions as well as infrastructure design and improvements may evolve and change, resulting in various revisions to the phasing program as described in Table 3-6 and shown in Exhibit 3-13. Travertine Draft EIR 3-39 October 2023 127 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Table 3-6 Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Construction Phasing Plan PA Land Use Acres Density Range du/ac Target Units Phase 1A and 18 Phase 1A 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 1.5-4.5 75 11 Resort/Golf 46.2 -- -- 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 1.5-4.5 105 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 1.5-4.5 48 14 Low Density Residential 39.0 1.5-4.5 65 15-A Low Density Residential 20.9 1.5-4.5 44 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 -- -- 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 -- -- Phase 1A Total 534.9 -- 337 Phase 18 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 1.5-4.5 31 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 1.5-4.5 61 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 1.5-4.5 73 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 4.5-8.5 72 15-B Low Density Residential 12.4 1.5-4.5 26 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 -- -- Phase 18 Total 93.7 -- 263 Phase 1A and 1B Total 628.6 -- 600 Phase 2 4 Low Density Residential 9.6 1.5-4.5 29 6 Medium Density Residential 20.1 4.5-8.5 163 16 Low Density Residential 50.4 1.5-4.5 116 Phase 2 Total 80.1 308 Phase 3 1 Resort/Spa 38.3 100 Resort Villas 2 Medium Density Residential 25.9 4.5-8.5 205 3 Low Density Residential 29.4 1.5-4.5 87 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 Phase 3 Total 111.7 292 du; 100 Resort Villas Total 820.4* 1,200 du; 100 Resort Villas *Master Planned Roadways are not included in the Grand Total. The Master Planned Roadways include the westerly extension of Avenue 62, Jefferson Street extension from the northwest Project corner, internal loop collector streets, and the Madison Street EVA. The Master Planned Roadways do not currently exist and will be built throughout the Project property from south-east of the Project property to north-west. The Master Planned Roadways equal approximately 35.0 acres, fora total project area of approximately855 (855.4) acres. Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Table 10, February 2022. Travertine Draft EIR 3-40 October 2023 128 _ PROPOSED JEFFERSON r' STREET t NAP J - " j -j LOOP STREET _ 1 I r PHASE 3 EAST } %) Il �. ��' � � • � PHASE 2 - r� ' LOOP STREET' WEST PHASE 1-B 'AVENUE 62 t_ fi Y ;er..r..r.E ,ti..rr�=r.:.��!��'rJl� I �• <.ti ,. �_�, •y'�r�G i rr 1•, sll,l' 'I,1111,•j.:•�f.'1-' � � 1 `F PHASE 1-A 4'— l T ti }y I �7�•ir �, .�: - .� Martinez ' .. •• •, _ I �, I Rock Slide N Source: TRG Land, Inc. IIIASA-CONSULTING INC. CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTION PHASING } ;' _:•I:r;'N� } iwI ;•!ar,,71dkc P!,N : •w N 0 NL141r�i'11{';i TRAVERTINE EXHIBIVf 13 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.8 Circulation The Project property is proposed to be served by two access points: (1) the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a Modified Secondary Arterial, south of Avenue 58, and (2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial west of Monroe Street. Jefferson Street will be extended south of Avenue 58 through the Coral Canyon development, a portion of Bureau Land Management (BLM) land and continue through Travertine to meet the extension of Avenue 62, dependent upon the timing of development of Coral Canyon and approvals through the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and BLM. The Travertine community land uses are proposed to be oriented on both sides of the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 central spine roadway, with local loop collector roads emanating from the spine roadway via roundabouts to provide access to the neighborhoods, as shown on Exhibit 3-14, Circulation Plan. Access to the water tanks proposed in the southwest portion of the Project property will be provided from the internal loop road. Coordination with CVAG will be necessary to the site the water tanks in this area. In addition, an access road will be installed along the western edge of the development for access to Section 5. The road will connect from the loop road of the Project property to Section 5, that will be defined as an easement to allow access to lands to the west from within the Project property, during the same construction phase as the loop road is built. An approximately 12.4-acre parcel is located between Planning Areas 1 and 2 and is not a part of the project (NAP). No Project -related development will occur on this parcel. However, the Project will provide a roadway for vehicular access to this parcel as part of the master plan roadways (see Table 3-5, Proposed Land Use by Planning Area). Construction Access During the Grading Phase A stage, Avenue 62 will cross Dike No. 4 and extend westerly towards the Project property. This crossing will provide construction access to the property and require a license, secured by the City of La Quinta, and approved by the BOR. A license has not yet been secured. The process will also include applying for a right of use authorization (SF 299), which will include construction level plans. Once reviewed, the BOR would make a determination. The license agreement with the BLM has been approved. The access road to Section 5, discussed above, will be developed during the construction of the loop collector roads emanating from the spine roadway. Emergency Vehicle Access Prior to any building construction, the Project will provide two points of access to the property, one for public access, and one for emergency vehicle access (EVA). Avenue 62 will act as the primary access point to the Project during Construction Phase 1 and after (discussed in Section 3.9, Phasing Travertine Draft EIR 3-42 October 2023 130 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Plan, of this Chapter). Secondary access will be provided from the southerly extension of Madison Street from Avenue 60. The Madison Street extension will be a 24-foot EVA in a 30-foot right of way (or easement) that crosses Dike No. 4 and continues south to the Project property. The Project proponent will obtain permissions from both CVWD and BOR to cross Dike No. 4 and its recharge basins. Exhibit 3-15, Phase 1 Interim EVA Access, illustrates the proposed EVA in relation to the associated Phase 1 construction. Operation As previously stated, the Project property is proposed to be served by two access points: (1) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial west of Monroe Street, and (2) the Jefferson Street extension at the northwest property corner. The roundabout streets will have a typical right-of-way of 70 feet, with curb -to -curb distances of 40 feet with 9-foot curb adjacent landscaped parkways and a 6-foot-wide pedestrian walkway on both sides. Local roads are also planned to be utilized and will be comprised of a curb -to -curb dimension of 32 feet, which allows for parking on one side of the street and 36 feet, which allows for parking on both sides of the street. These residential local roads will provide a landscape easement at a minimum of 12 feet on each side of the street and 15 feet to residential building. An access road easement will be provided for entry to Section 5 for any future uses. The road will connect from the loop road of the Project property to Section 5, that will be defined as an easement and entitled by the Applicant to allow access from the Project, during the same construction phase as the loop road is built. Gates The Project neighborhoods will be gated for privacy. These gates will be located at the intersections of the loop roads and Jefferson Street or Avenue 62. The Resort/Spa entry at Jefferson will also be gated. Gating of individual neighborhoods within the residential planning areas is permitted. The location of any proposed gates will be reviewed and approved by the City as part of either a tentative tract map application or as a part of a site plan review application. Emergency and secondary access into the gated areas will be provided for emergency vehicles. Secondary access points will be provided via the local roads, from the main spine roads. Travertine Draft EIR 3-43 October 2023 131 PROPOSED JEFFERSON Y STREET rr, —. 1 NAP ' I a I 5L L •y„� I I I +� 1 J I '•;� I 5 I L. k' l � J rL 1 i ' J '+ i Y 1{ 'r• LOOP STREET I WEST 'a ti • }i•1 -� 'I � •1 •' I LLJ ti 4 ,�. �� '�,• '• I I•I •• II .. 5I I� I+ � '4 L iy {5 I} � ,� r •y 4 '. F. 3 f. • I i' .I I, , I I 1.• 7 I Martinez �L • � `�ti� • - I I i r Rock Slide / ' \ r ' I 1 LEGEND Jefferson Street / Avenue 62 Roundabout v 1 Emergency Vehicular Access Loop Collector ® Gates © Local Roads 0 Access Road Source: TRG Land, Inc. a AVENUE 62 �r A. CON SUL.TIN G. INC, CIRCULATION PLAN TRAVERTINE �:1L:�}Jr�IN�•}�14J_ �!�rrlll���p,I+�.x.4i,,5iL111,!y�l,ci'll{',I EXHIBIfi33-14 r �aI10E92 'f v ' Th 8 • .. ..5 .. �+�* _. - ,i :ram :.i R — Avenue 60 LE[EN❑ derfgregn 81rgg1 +AYenue Q A j QSjou.. I�. i IaVaied Craijp n9 L04p Cold for f m"s Road L_jU Round2bout �� TampararyEVACale MSS CONSULTING I PHASE 1 INTERIM EVA ACCESS } �LJr; M1lr.} VI. =!Jr:•1r�iW ;FI:J�Q 4ltitiCy�l.l92' TRAVERTINE Source: Fire Master Plan, Exhibit 2.8, TRG Land, Inc. EXH IW i-15 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.9 Infrastructure Plan Existing infrastructure on the Project property is very limited as the site has not been previously developed. The former vineyard area was provided with water from an on -site well. In addition to the Master Planned Roadway system, the Project also includes a master plan for infrastructure including drainage features, underground utilities, domestic water wells, and water reservoirs. The Project would be supplied with electricity by IID and a new IID substation may be required to serve the Project. The precise location of the future substation is not yet known, but would be located within the off -site utility field. Please refer to Exhibits 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3. 3.9.1 Water The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) hasjurisdiction over domestic water service to the Project property. Currently, domestic water service lines exist in two areas near the Project property. These include the intersection of Avenue 60 and Madison Street, and the intersection of Monroe Street and Avenue 62. The Project property will be required to connect to CVWD's existing water distribution network. However, water pressure at the two existing service line locations is not adequate to serve the proposed Project property. Proposed Project finish pad elevations will require two domestic water pressure zones within the Project property — Zone 335 and 425. Additional water storage will be required for each of these zones. Three booster stations will be necessary for water delivery to the property. One booster station will be located on an existing parcel owned by CVWD near the intersection of Avenue 62 and Monroe Street. A second booster station will be located within the Project property along the alignment of the Madison Street EVA. The third booster station will be located on the Project property for the Zone 425 reservoir. Booster stations include all necessary aboveground and underground appurtenances including pumps and motors, piping valves, mechanical, structural, electrical, telemetry, back-up generator, and other miscellaneous equipment, housed within a covered equipment building. Booster pump station sites (when not located adjacent to a reservoir) shall be a minimum of 150 feet by 150 feet. The Project proposes two on -site water reservoirs (Zone 335 and Zone 425) to be constructed within Planning Area 20. The proposed upper tank is located at an elevation of 425 feet, with a volume of 600 thousand gallons and a 60-foot diameter, and the lower tank is located at an elevation of 335 feet with a volume of 2.65 million gallons and a 110-foot diameter. Upper and lower tank diameters are approximations based on anticipated volume. The sizes of the tanks will be confirmed during the design and approval process. Access to the proposed water tanks will be provided from an internal road. The water reservoir locations, including related facilities (service roadway, underground pipelines, etc.) are subject to review and approval by the USFWS, CVWD, and the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC). Both water tanks proposed onsite will be included in Phase A grading and operable priorto lumber drop. All other improvements will be prohibited in the restricted Open Space Natural land use area, which will otherwise remain undisturbed. A portion of the Open Travertine Draft EIR 3-46 October 2023 134 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Space Natural Planning Areas is located in the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains (SRSJM) Conservation Area of the Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). The Project was reviewed by the Joint Project Review (JPR) committee (CVCC and other interested Wildlife Agencies) regarding development of the water infrastructure improvements within the Conservation Area. During the JPR process, the committee had the opportunity to comment on the proposed development. The JPR review and approval occurred in March of 2021. Consult Section 4.4, Biological Resources, for further discussion. As discussed previously in Section 3.8, Circulation, (above) the Project proposes an EVA route that will be developed during Phase I of Project construction. Water lines will be extended from Avenue 62 and Madison Street to serve the Project. Water lines will be connected prior to any construction. This is illustrated in Exhibit 3-16, Phase 1 Interim Conceptual Water Plan. The Project property will be served with a twelve -inch main line within Jefferson Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 62 alignments. Twelve -inch and smaller lines will then feed off the main line to serve the individual developments along these public streets. Precise locations, alignments, and sizes of water service facilities will be determined at the Tentative and Final Map stage of development, per City and CVWD regulations and standards. Irrigation water for the golf training facility turf and landscaping will be provided by CVWD. Infrastructure will be installed in the Grading Phase A stage to convey the water to the site (see Section 3.7, Project Construction, of this Chapter for a discussion of Project phasing). The conceptual on -site water service facilities that are required to provide domestic water to the community is indicated in Exhibit 3-17, Conceptual Water Plan. The Project will also develop onsite and off -site well sites. CVWD's Development and Design Manual Section 5.6.1, Well Site, requires that the Project applicant provide up to five well sites for water supply. Two off -site wells will be constructed during Phase 1, located within a 2-mile radius of the Project property and as shown on the "off -site utility field". The off -site well locations have not yet been determined; however, two wells will be operable and available prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Use and Occupancy. The location of the future well sites are currently under discussion with CVWD. The precise location of the off -site utility field has not been determined, however, future wells are proposed east of the Project property, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west. Currently, the offsite locations are characterized by vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land (see Exhibit 3-3 in this Chapter). The locations of the wells are subject to the approval of CVWD. This Draft EIR provides a programmatic analysis of the future offsite well site impacts (as well as the IID substation) to the various environmental topics analyzed in this document. Travertine Draft EIR 3-47 October 2023 135 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.9.2 Wastewater System CVWD provides sanitary sewer service in the area. The closest sewer connection is located at the intersection of Monroe Street and Avenue 62, approximately one mile east of the Project property. The Project proposes to extend the sewer mains along Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street to the Project property. The proposed onsite facilities are comprised of a series of eight -inch sewer lines serving the individual developments and flowing by gravity into the main sewer line located within Jefferson Street/spine road alignment. The main sewer line in Jefferson Street increases in size as it extends eastward, ranging from eight (8) inches on the west side to fifteen (15) inches at Madison Street, where the line exits the Project property. The offsite sewer alignment continues east in Avenue 62, crossing Dike No. 4, then easterly to the existing sewer in Monroe Street. The Project will ultimately discharge flows to Water Reclamation Plant 4 (WRP-4) located in the unincorporated community of Thermal, California. Final design criteria, location, alignment, and sizing of sewer facilities will be determined at the tentative and final map stage of development, pursuant to the processes and specifications of the City and CVWD. Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR will offer an in-depth discussion of the wastewater system proposed for the project. As previously stated, Exhibit 3-18, Conceptual Sewer Plan, illustrates the sewer line locations proposed for the Project. 3.9.3 Solid Waste Services associated with the collection and disposal of solid waste generated within the Travertine community will be operated and administered by Burrtec per the contract with the City of La Quinta. Individual developments within the Project property will implement measures that will be consistent with City regulations designed to reduce solid wastes, including, but not limited to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939), which requires each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50 percent of its waste away from landfills (see Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems). 3.9.4 Dry Utilities Electricity The Project property is currently served with electrical power from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Power from this source was used during the time when the vineyard was last active (2007) to pump irrigation water from three existing privately -owned wells. The wells are currently not in operation because the vineyard is no longer active, and the power has since then been disconnected. An off -site 2.5-acre substation may be required for the Travertine development and is anticipated to be constructed during the Construction Phase 1A. Currently there are ongoing discussions with local parcel owners, IID and developers, to locate the future offsite substation. All off -site parcels required Travertine Draft EIR 3-48 October 2023 136 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION for the substation will be chosen to fit the requirements of IID and will be studied with metrics provided by the utility. The location of the 2.5-acre site will be within 2-miles of the Project property. The location of the offsite substation has not been determined at the time this EIR was written, however, it is proposed to be located east and northeast of the Project property, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. Currently, the off -site utility field locations are characterized by vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land (see Exhibit 3-3 in this Chapter). The location is subject to approval by IID. This Draft EIR analyzes the future offsite substation impacts to the various environmental topics, including energy resources and utilities, at a programmatic level. The routing of the proposed service lines along the route to the site will be studied for visual impacts and aesthetics in addition to all other known impact metrics that IID will make available. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed Project shall be installed underground. Power lines with voltage higher than 92 kV are exempt from being installed underground. Natural Gas Currently there is no natural gas provided on site. Natural gas would be provided to the Project property by Southern California Gas Company through the extension of natural gas infrastructure via Avenue 62 over Dike No. 4 at the Applicant's expense. Telephone Service Telephone service will be provided by Frontier or Spectrum. Travertine Draft EIR 3-49 October 2023 137 ff Gb��l� Y T T• ••' I i T J i I I I I I T I ■ �~' Y Jr!•� hi F• ticwr.•�w } r I r � -CVWD WATER EXHIBIT PHASE 1 LB.'�ENO I — i �TJ2vK � R�3D Ja}• L I � sane 10 tis, y ' FinNOT 4T SA CONSULTING IN C PHASE I INTERIM CONCEPTUAL WATER PLAN }_, C. r;'S1� r }. ' I.a��rr cl;:: TRAVERTINEEXHIBIVI-16 Source: Proactive Engineering Consultants % PA'06Agoyr PSONti lb % L IL V ao N?AAP fyip STF 15A.7 IF LOOP .5 TREE 7 LZRM3 Do:!kg na i o 2 G n r. Sew Lp i ion 33t r-mkf,!i- Wme, klm 425; D-1 0 �� WR ee N 0 Y- Source: TRG Land, Inc. ar Z 01 NE 4Z;S ZONE, 335r I Fl P qxK Ug Sk* P Wp" SCffi DC -.- I Cf- wotmm 212 m -AVENUE62 :ME AVE 6V#� R T BOOSTER Off -1 21d f. V .9. rlJ MSACONSULTING, INCCONCEPTUAL WATER PLAN AN IJN,�IG 3 ivi- EWAW,'MAQ:�A%Q 1-114-1 TRAVERTINE EXHIBIR17 I PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET■' ry F NAP +T ■ t .,'• - is 4 , ' I 8 tip„ I LOOP STREET I ' .. � I $y WEST {' $» 8 - rz yr•• ■ i 6ff 81, 811 1: 8.��,,_,arr.8 _ •ti � 41 `ti 16 r Martinez '` I —�x f Rock Slide f�'S r ref—r Wm. I f LEGEND V - Sewer Lines Source: TRG Land, Inc. A• CON SULTING� I N C, } _-',I Jr;■M1Jf- } - iyI !Af;iI IdkE c P!r'dQ ti L' iLIU�rc:i'I1{'1-1 AVENUE 62 8114 CONCEPTUAL SEWER PLAN TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT 18 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.9.5 Grading and Drainage The Project property slopes gently in a downslope direction from west to east and is subject to two types of drainage conditions: alluvial fan flow and incised drainage channels along less active fans. Existing drainage originates in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south. The primary existing drainage conditions is alluvial fan flow; eight canyon drainages contribute runoff to the overall Project property. The major contributors of runoff to the planned development areas are Devil Canyon, Middle North Canyon, Middle South Canyon, and Rock Avalanche Canyon. Flows from these canyons and other drainages continue across the site and ultimately drain into the reservoir created by Dike No. 4. Exhibit 3-19, Existing Hydrology, illustrates the existing hydrologic conditions that occur at the undeveloped Project property. Grading Master Plan The Project's topography is largely defined by the natural alluvial fan flow and the slopes surrounding the property. The area planned to be graded is generally comprised of slopes of between 0 percent and 10 percent. The property is elevated, and grading will potentially be visible to areas north of the property. The grading will maintain the natural orientation and drainage of the land by implementing varied contoured grading at 3:1 to 5:1 ratio in conformance with the natural terrain. The sections will demonstrate day -lighted slopes to natural, where natural slopes meet the graded slopes, as well as relationships between typical pads, proposed surface improvements, channels, trails, proposed golf course grading, reservoir pads, etc. at various locations throughout the Project property. Additionally, all areas adjacent to General Plan designated open space areas shall comply with the requirements of Section 9.110.070 and 9.140.040 (Hillside Conservation Regulations) of the Municipal Code. All grading will be performed under the supervision of an Engineering Geologist to guarantee a stable site for the intended use. Landscaping and irrigation facilities will be required for all graded slopes greater than 5 feet in height or areas susceptible to erosion. Track -mounted portable crushers will be used directly on site, to allow rock crushing to exact grading specification. Rock crushing on -site will eliminate the need for exporting rock and importing good fill material while also avoiding traffic congestion, damage to roads and mud track -out, whilst providing dust control. Future final maps will include detailed grading plans and supporting engineering designs and analyses for review and approval by the City of La Quinta. Exhibit 3-20, Conceptual Grading Plan, and Exhibit 3-21, Slope Ratio Diagram, illustrates the onsite grading and slope ratios proposed for the Travertine development. Drainage Master Plan The approach to the management of drainage in the Specific Plan Amendment is to concentrate the planned development within the inactive fan areas where possible, and provide a perimeter flood protection system around the development site to provide the necessary level of protection. The Travertine Draft EIR 3-53 October 2023 141 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION primary watershed solution, illustrated in Exhibit 3-22 Conceptual Hydrology Plan, displays flows being conveyed around the Project site in order to pass flows to the downstream off -site areas along Dike No. 4 in a manner that avoids flooding risks to the downstream areas. Project implementation will require management of active alluvial fan flow conditions on the western and southern edges of the planned development area. To manage this condition, it is determined that a perimeter flood protection barrier will be used along the western and southern boundaries. The barrier will consist of a raised edge condition with a slope lining to protect against scour and erosion. The edge will be elevated above that water surface elevations associated with the 100-year storm event, and will be designed based on worst -case flow scenario assuming an active alluvial fan flow condition. The western and southern edge protection is illustrated in Exhibits 3-23 and 3-24, from the project -specific Drainage Master Plan (Appendix J.3). These flood protection barriers will intercept alluvial fan flows, incised canyon flows, and will control associated debris load. They will also allow planned conveyance facilities around the Project property. The proposed conveyance features will direct off -site flows, once intercepted by the barriers, around the perimeter of the development by means of open channel swales to safe outlets on the north and south sides of the development. The site itself will be raised along these edge barriers to avoid the creation of levee -like conditions. The offsite run-off from Devils Canyon will be distributed on the north through the existing Guadalupe Dike system to Dike No. 4. Offsite watershed runoff from the Middle Canyons (North and South) and Rock Avalanche Canyon will be intercepted and conveyed along the southern portion of the Project property to Dike No. 4 north of the proposed Avenue 62 crossing. Exhibit 3-22, Conceptual Hydrology Plan, illustrates the off -site and proposed on -site water flow. Per Exhibit 3-22, flows will be conveyed around the Project property on the west and south boundaries and re -distributed on the east along Dike No. 4. The drainage master plan for the Travertine development ensures that all residents of the community, as well as downstream facilities and properties, will be protected from periodic flooding that is experienced in the region. The Project proposes various conceptual storm facilities (perimeter barriers, on -site drainage) that are required to transmit storm runoff flows. More detailed engineering and design, consistent with design standards established by the City and CVWD, will be completed at the final map stages of development, resulting in the precise location, alignment, and sizing of drainage facilities. Onsite drainage facilities will be designed to capture first flush surface runoff. This is discussed in greater detail in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, in this Draft EIR. Onsite drainage facilities will primarily include a system of underground storm drains and catch basins to intercept, convey, and infiltrate stormwater runoff within the Project property to ensure equivalence between pre- and post -development conditions. Specifically, stormwater will be conveyed down the Project property gradient and into two primary surface basins (Basin A and Basin B) located at the east -end of the Project property. The basins are sized and located as to ensure that the stormwater flow rates and volumes resulting from the developed condition are equal to or less Travertine Draft EIR 3-54 October 2023 142 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION than the pre -development condition. Exhibit 3-25, Onsite Drainage Plan and Cross Section, illustrates the proposed onsite storm drain systems and basins. See Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR for further discussion of on -site drainage. Travertine Draft EIR 3-55 October 2023 143 .M �-, L� Ewb Source: Travertine Specific Plan, TRG Land, Inc. MSA- ONSUL.TIN INC EXISTING HYDROLOGY TRAVERTINE ,=!Jr:•�r�.;FLJ�Q'4JtitiLyr'.l9''oi'I�{';i EXHIBI't-19 - t al PROPOSED JEFFERSON y - 'S�•• ,,;; - STREET I _! P NAP �. I ' . k }r .. - • }.� _, � F - LOOP STREET •, EAST L� y I I lI I �F —4% -- ' 'J• LOOP STREET =_�� WEST ! 7 5: 7 ' r ..,yam_ _AVENUE 62 rr r � }• � �. L f'• 1: �. �` {ram •- Martinez { y Rock Slide +T r LEGEND 0 Cut Area Fill Area Source: TRG Land, Inc. IIIASACONSULTING INC. CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN } - lJr;'M1Jf- } iVI ; !ar,,1Idk: �P!r'd .w :N0111 L IU�rc:i'II{';I - TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT 20 14 fy • _ �4 '- _ 14 I � 1. f'- � - PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET - - jj� NAPI�-1 P- r= _ I LOOP STREET r' EAST ' 7�3Yj�I' 1 I � r. I• I 1 -I 1 j1 y • -I 1 1 1 I 1 I LOOP STREET WEST AVENUE 62 r} kl 1 } F tf I N _ 1 V ti 1 1 JL l I 1 1 ♦ 'k � r• 1 1 � � r I ' 1.5 Martinez ` I Rock Slide 00 _EGEND Slope 5:1 Slope 3:1 Slope 2:1 Source: TRG Land, Inc. SSA. CONSULT1 N Q I N . SLOPE RATIO DIAGRAM LAP s iSrl_ =j,r„lldl'q'1dC�. N' k;-D1!1.'U�F;,II{,,, TRAVERTINE EXHIBI4@-21 "�' •. it r�r��-. � - - C�. �I� .�Yti PROPOSED JEFFERSON , I LOOP STREET STREET GUADALUPE CREEK ti : = - DIVERSION DIKES fi�—�� - — JILI, ' . NAP �� 'ti ti�-•�w ->+'-`' AVENUE 62 �.:.- — • OUTLET PIPES FROM BASINS ' Y L y" Martinez 5 Rock Slide _--- .EGEND Existing Major Watershed Perimeter Flood Barrier 0 High Point Existing Sheet Flow on -Site Drainage Watershed Diversion 0 WQMP Basin �I Source: TRG Land, Inc. & Travertine Drainage Master Plan, Q3 A CONSULTING II DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN - CONCEPTUAL HYDROLOGY ; PING *wrllU��Vll<', TRAVERTINE EXH1BP-22 uadal u p�k' • Y` rn North Bank60 Guadalupe Dike South BankAVE A t i Diversion Dike i RoadlBridge RoadlBrid e . „4 '� bra rtine Crossing i IVAP Boundary Wort -Edge : { Protection .{ South Edge Protection Source: Travertine Drainage Master Plan, Q3 Crossing Roadf8r:dge Crossing FLOOD PROTECTION PLAN WA -CONSULTING INC.TRAVERTINE mJLA?JN•NG}. iwl. ,=!Jf:-'Ids.;FMQ'5'4Abdic! EXHIBM43-23 rb-isl roil WSE (4-4) Slkdimea�liaa �—�,,. $rc Il t Qr«pCh � Mkt U Ri L SLOPE PJ�0 U-0 K + West Edge SECTION 8-B tm F € . � ' Mimi fr b"w FUSE (0*mr L, $Gaol v> anor I J 1 300E South Edge SECTION -C Source: Travertine Drainage Master Plan, Q3 4 FLOOD CONVEYANCE WEST AND SOUTH EDGES MSA. CONSUL.TING� I N C TRAVERTINE '4JtitiCy�.ILJ i'lII%-, EXHIBIT49-24 1 F Storm oral systeIrl Wer uo I I ty 9 as i ns - I I Ave t2 A` 110 Storm WEltef ae€entlon Basins '. A IN Ir FEEfflAM I COVR l+i CE_P f H — '3 J IW ILTRATE VA -LW Sources: Travertine Hydrology Report, Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc.; Travertine Drainage Management Plan, Q3. CON SULTIN , I N � =. ON -SITE DRAINAGE PLAN AND CROSS-SECTION �vt1�i1'+�n,� 11 i'4'�IhIr:ERFNf, fi:F r �; : F.a;�rl Ysl;_o TRAVERTINE EXHIBI-M-25 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.10 Project Implementation The City of La Quinta is the public agency responsible for the administration of the Project. The entitlement procedures required for future development applications within the Travertine community shall be in conformance with those procedures established and set forth in the Amended Specific Plan and the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. All development applications shall be reviewed by the City of La Quinta. Should the Project be approved, implementation would include the following entitlement processes: Tentative Tract Map (TTM): In addition to the TTM which is part of the Project, future TTMs are intended to implement the Project and subdivide the property into smaller lots for development. TTMs may be filed with each phase of development as necessary. Each TTM will require review by the Planning Commission. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): Uses that require a CUP shall be processed in accordance with Section 9.210.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3.11 Intended Uses of This EIR This Draft EIR examines the environmental impacts of the Project and identifies feasible measures to mitigate such impacts to the maximum extent reasonable. The Draft EIR allows the City of La Quinta, other responsible agencies, and interested parties to evaluate the proposed Project and make informed decisions with respect to the requested entitlements. The CEQA Guidelines require an EIR to include a statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, including a list of agencies expected to use the EIR in their decision making and the list of the permits and other approvals required for Project implementation. The City of La Quinta will use this Draft EIR to provide information on the potential environmental effects of the following proposed actions: • Certification of the EIR (EA 2017-0008) • Adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2017-002) • Adoption of a Zone Change (ZC 2017-002) • Adoption of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004) • Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 37387 (TTM 2017-0008) • Approval of a Development Agreement 3.12 Responsible Agencies Section 15124 (d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that the Project Description in an EIR include a list of permits and other approvals required to implement a proposed project, the agencies expected to use the EIR in their decision making, and related environmental review and consultation Travertine Draft EIR 3-63 October 2023 151 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION requirements. The following are anticipated responsible agencies which may rely on this Draft EIR for their discretionary approvals required to implement the Project: • California Department of Fish and Wildlife o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 for the water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • State Water Resources Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (Region 7) o Construction Stormwater General Permit, Notice of Intent to Comply with Section 402 of the Clean Water Act o Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) • Coachella Valley Water District o Approval of the proposed water tanks and related infrastructure; off -site and on -site drainage systems, improvements to the Guadalupe dikes in conjunction with the improvements to Jefferson Street; o Approval of Regional and Local Hydrology/Drainage Studies o Water Supply Assessment (WSA) o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 for the water tanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • South Coast Air Quality Management District o PM-10 Plan for compliance with Rule 403.1; Dust Control in the Coachella Valley. • Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 forthe watertanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). • Imperial Irrigation District o Review and approval of the proposed substation site and related agreements with the Project applicant o Implementation of Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Permit for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and review of the proposed improvements in Planning Area 20 forthe watertanks and related infrastructure (road, pipelines). Other Agencies Consulted • Bureau of Land Management (BLM): Consultation with the BLM regarding the proposed extension of Jefferson Street and development in areas adjacent to BLM—managed lands. • Bureau of Reclamation (BOR): Consultation with the BOR regarding development in areas adjacent to BOR owned lands. Travertine Draft EIR 3-64 October 2023 152 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • United States Fish and Wildlife Service: Consultation with the USFWS regarding project impacts to federally protected special status species. Travertine Draft EIR 3-65 October 2023 153 Page intentionally blank 154 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis 4.0 Introduction This EIR for the Travertine Specific Plan provides analysis of impacts for all environmental resource categories under CEQA. Sections 4.1 through 4.19 discuss the environmental impacts that may result with implementation of the Project. 4.0.1 Resource Categories Addressed in the EIR The following environmental resource categories are addressed in this chapter: 4.1 Aesthetics 4.11 Land Use and Planning 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry 4.12 Noise 4.3 Air Quality 4.13 Population and Housing 4.4 Biological Resources 4.14 Public Services 4.5 Cultural and Paleontological Resources 4.15 Recreation 4.6 Energy 4.16 Transportation 4.7 Geology and Soils 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.19 Wildfire 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality It was determined in the NOP that the Project would result in no impacts to mineral resources, and therefore, this resource area is not required to be analyzed further in the Draft EIR. Please consult Appendix A and Chapter 6.0, Effect Found to Have No Impact, of this Draft EIR for an analysis of the environmental topics, and conclusions of the mineral resources environmental topic. 4.0.2 Format of the EIR Each section of this chapter is formatted with the following headings • Introduction • Existing Conditions • Regulatory Setting • Project Impact Analysis, including Thresholds of Significance • Cumulative Impacts • Mitigation Measures • Level of Significance After Mitigation • References Travertine Draft EIR 4.0-1 October 2023 155 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Introduction This section includes a brief introduction of the environmental impact to be analyzed within the section as it pertains to the Project and identifies sources used to evaluate the potential environmental effects. Existing Conditions This section contains a discussion of the existing conditions, services and physical environment of the Project property and vicinity. Regulatory Setting This section includes the local, State, and federal regulatory framework that is assumed in the analysis of each resource area. Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance Determining the severity of Project impacts is fundamental to achieving the objectives of CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, which requires that decision makers mitigate, to the degree feasible, the potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR. If the EIR identifies any potentially significant and unavoidable impacts, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 requires decision makers approving a project to adopt a statement of overriding considerations that explains why the benefits of the project outweigh the adverse environmental consequences associated with implementation of the project. The level of significance for each impact examined in the EIR was determined by considering the predicted magnitude of the impact against the applicable thresholds of significance. Thresholds were developed using criteria from the CEQA Guidelines; State, federal, and local regulatory guidance; local/regional plans and ordinances; accepted professional practices; consultation with recognized experts; and other professional opinions. The following adjectives are used specifically to define the degree of impact used in the Impact Analysis. An "adverse" impact is any negative environmental result of the project, however small. As a disclosure document, the finding of an impact as "adverse" merely indicates that the project will cause an impact to occur compared to existing conditions, even though that impact may be less than significant. For example, the removal of vegetation from a vacant site might be considered adverse (i.e., "negative") but it may not exceed a local threshold such as loss of native plants or plant communities. Therefore, an impact may be adverse without being significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.0-2 October 2023 156 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS A "significant" impact is one that exceeds a threshold of significance. CEQA defines a significant effect on the environment as "...a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse (i.e., negative) change in any of the physical conditions within the area by the project, including land, air, water, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance... (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15382). All "potentially significant" impacts are identified in the EIR. Methodology This section discusses the methodology used during the technical analysis where necessary. Project Impact The environmental impact analyses conducted for each environmental topic were undertaken pursuant to the following CEQA Guidelines sections: • Section 15126, Consideration and Discussion of Environmental Impacts; and • Section 15126.2, Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts The results of the impact analyses discussed under each environmental topic were evaluated for significance relative to the thresholds of significance identified at the beginning of each environmental impact discussion. The thresholds of significance presented are taken from Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form, of the CEQA Guidelines, and where applicable, also include quantified performance standards including those set forth in Appendix F: Energy Conservation of the CEQA Guidelines. Cumulative Impacts An EIR must discuss a cumulative impact if the Project's incremental effect combined with the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects is "cumulatively considerable." (CEQA Guidelines, §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." (CEQA Guidelines, §15065(a)(3)) The basis for the cumulative impact analyses provided in this Draft EIR is consistent with this Section. Additionally, Section 15130 (b) states: "The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact." This discussion analyzes the Project's cumulative impacts in conjunction with the City of La Quinta General Plan buildout and other factors identified for each environmental topic. Travertine Draft EIR 4.0-3 October 2023 157 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Mitigation Measures In some cases, following the impact discussion, reference is made to State and federal regulations compliance with which would fully or partially mitigate the impact. In addition, policies and programs from applicable local land use plans that partially or fully mitigate the impact may be cited. Project - specific mitigation measures that are recommended in the DEIR as conditions of Project approval through implementation of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are offset with a summary heading and described using the format presented below: 13I0-1: Consistent with the terms of the Project Biological Opinion, an 8-foot-tall wildlife fence constructed of tubular steel and painted to blend in with the desert environment shall be installed where the Project interfaces with Coral Mountain along the northern boundary and extend southward along the western and southern boundary of proposed development to preclude PBS from entering the Project. The fence shall extend to where Avenue 62 intersects with the eastern Project boundary. Level of Significance After Mitigation This section identifies the resulting level of significance of the impact following mitigation. References This section lists the resources used to write the section. The resources can also be found in Chapter 8.0, References, of this EIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.0-4 October 2023 158 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.1 Aesthetics 4.1 Aesthetics 4.1.1 Introduction This section of the Travertine Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") describes the existing aesthetic character of the Project property and surrounding area. This section also analyzes the potential impacts to the aesthetic quality of the property and surroundings and determines whether Project implementation would result in significant impacts. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the La Quinta General Plan, and the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report, as well as other planning documents, visual simulations, and aerial imagery of the Project property and surrounding area. Sources used in the preparation of this section are identified in Subsection 4.1.8, References, of this Aesthetics Section, and Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR. 4.1.2 Existing Conditions The Project property is currently characterized by both vacant and disturbed land. An abandoned cultivated vineyard occupies the northern portion of the Project property (approximately 26.7 percent of the property). The cultivated vineyard has been out of operation since 2007 and limited portions of the now inoperable irrigation equipment remain visible. The vacant and generally undisturbed portions of the property are characterized by desert vegetation which can be identified as a sparse desert creosote scrub community and limited areas of desert dry wash woodland. The native plant life found on upland portions of the property is comprised primarily of Creosote Bush, White Bursage, and Mesquite. The natural arroyo drainages support a Dry Wash Woodland community, which includes Palo Verde, Smoketree, and Cat -Claw Acacia, which compromises most of the property, while several types of cactus are scattered across the alluvial fan. Existing Viewsheds The topography of the region progresses from the flat desert floor, where La Quinta is located, to the top of dramatic mountaintops that rise over 10,000 feet. The contrast between the flat desert landscape and the mountain peaks surrounding it provides views and picturesque landscapes for residents and visitors. The City of La Quinta is located adjacent to the Santa Rosa Mountains, which reach 8,717 feet at Toro Peak. Coral Reef Mountain (Coral Mountain) is an isolated spur of the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains and stands approximately 400 feet above mean sea level. The Santa Rosa Mountains are located west and south of the Project, and Coral Mountain is located north of the Project property. The Martinez Rockslide is also a significant landform in the City, lying south of Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-1 October 2023 159 4.1 AESTHETICS the Project property's boundary. Each of these landforms create the scenic viewsheds in southern La Quinta, and are the basis of the analysis of existing surrounding aesthetics vistas. Additional mountain ranges surrounding the City and Coachella Valley include the San Jacinto Mountains, the Little San Bernardino Mountains, Indio Hills, San Bernardino Mountains. Mount San Jacinto, west of the City, is the furthest north peak of the San Jacinto Mountains, with an elevation of 10,804 feet, which is only visible from the eastern portion of the City, away from the foothills at the Valley margins. The Little San Bernardino Mountains lie north of the City and are visible in the northern areas of La Quinta. The San Bernardino Mountains are located to the northwest, and the Indio Hills are located to the northeast and east. Existing natural features, developed properties, and landscaping obstruct views of the San Jacinto, Little San Bernardino, and San Bernardino Mountains and Indio Hills from the Project property. The Santa Rosa, San Jacinto, and Little San Bernardino Mountains are considered scenic vistas within the City of La Quinta (page III-4, La Quinta General Plan EIR). Toro Peak is the tallest mountain in the Santa Rosa Mountains. Coral Mountain is another peak within the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains; however, it is much lower than Toro Peak. Other mountains providing a visual resource for La Quinta include the San Bernardino Mountains to the northwest, Little San Bernardino Mountains to the north, the Indio Hills to the northeast and east, and the Mecca Hills to the east. Established in 2000, the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument encompasses approximately 280,000 acres managed by the BLM and U.S. Forest Service. The Monument includes the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains, which provides aesthetic, biological, cultural, recreational, geological, educational, and scientific values. The Monument is covered under the BLM's California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA). The Project property is located east of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument. Due to the undeveloped and vacant character that currently defines the Project property, views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west, Coral Mountain to the north, and the Martinez Rockslide to the south are generally visible from publicly accessible views in the vicinity of the Project property. However, manmade features that currently obstruct the views of these scenic vistas from public rights -of -ways include Dike No. 4, located east of the Project. Dike No. 4, depending on the viewpoint, obstructs base views of the Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountain, and the Martinez Rockslide from various public viewsheds, including Avenue 62; however, due to the size of these topographic features, the mid -range and peaks of the landmarks remain visible. Site Context The Travertine Project property is proposed on lands that are located west of and behind Dike No. 4. The valley floor east of Dike No. 4 ranges in elevation from -20 to -80 feet below sea level, gently sloping to the southeast. The top of intervening Dike No. 4 occurs at an elevation of 0 feet sea level and has the effect of visually obstructing the primary Project property the closer this large structure Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-2 October 2023 160 4.1 AESTHETICS is approached. The Martinez Rockslide delineates the Project property's southern boundary. This natural landform is approximately 560 feet above sea level in elevation. Existing Visual Character The existing visual character of the City ranges from wilderness to rural agriculture to suburban. The northern and central portion of La Quinta, however, exemplifies the suburban visual character, comprised of residential neighborhoods, resort properties, commercial shopping centers, office parks, golf courses, parks and community facilities. Buildings tend to be low-rise, which preserves views of the surrounding mountains from private and public lands. Unlike the northern and central portion of the City, the southern and eastern portions of the City are characterized by rural and non -urbanized visual character. These areas consist of agricultural land uses typically found in the eastern portion of the City and surrounding area, including within the City's Sphere of Influence, residential communities (primarily gated golf communities), undeveloped and vacant lots, water infrastructure (i.e., levees, percolation ponds), and natural landscape (i.e., Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountains, and Martinez Rockslide). Most roadways in the southern portion of the City are paved, however, some do not include curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements. The exhibits below include photographs taken from various locations around the Project property and southern La Quinta, oriented towards the Project property. The photographs illustrate the existing conditions from Avenue 62, east of the Project, the Madison Street and Avenue 60 intersection, Jefferson Street, south of Dike No. 2, and at the Project property's proposed northwest corner, where the Jefferson Street extension would connect to the Project property. In addition to the public viewsheds observed from public rights -of -way, and along property boundaries, other important viewsheds in the area include those from the Boohoff Trail. These locations are considered public viewsheds because they provide publicly accessible views of the surrounding mountain ranges, which are considered scenic vistas by the City. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-3 October 2023 161 6 MSA CONSULTING, IN m {F, SIr m ' IVi j":-)" I: i W. fi,i A 1: ".' ' AVENUE 62 EAST OF PROJECT MADISON AVENUE AND AVENUE 60 INTERSECTION f • P.r ' y' _ JEFFERSON ST. SOUTH OF DIKE NO.2 7L_ 21 PROPOSED JEFFERSON ST. 0 EXTENSION, ot NORTHWEST PROJECT CORNER EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM LOCAL ROADS TRAVE�6rNE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIt 1-1 4.1 AESTHETICS Project Location The Project property encompasses an area of approximately 855 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta. The Project property is generally bounded by vacant private land and the Coral Mountains to the north, the US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)/Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Dike No. 4 and related stormwater impoundments to the east, the Martinez Rockslide to the south, limited private open space, and extensive areas of public land primarily under ownership and management of the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on adjoining alluvial fans and in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west. Table 3-1, Surrounding Land Uses, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, provides a detailed list of the uses that surround the proposed Project property and contribute to the existing visual characteristic and scenic quality of the area. The Travertine property is located in the southern portion of the City of La Quinta (Exhibit 3-1, Regional Location Map, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description). As displayed in Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, (Chapter 3.0) the local area is characterized with agricultural lands and major flood control dikes and levees, as well as a number of golf course communities north and east of the Project property. The Santa Rosa Mountains and their foothills and peaks are part of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument and this significant local and regional viewshed will remain as open space in perpetuity, thus affording residents and visitors with permanent scenic vistas. As stated above, the Project property is surrounded by lands owned by CVWD, BOR, BLM, and private owners. The BLM owns land south of the Project property (Martinez Rockslide) and areas along the northern half of the Project property's western boundary. The BOR owns areas adjacent to the northern property boundary, and areas west of the property boundary and south of Avenue 62. CVWD owns lands north and northeast of the Project property boundaries (percolation ponds), and private groups own parcels north of the Project property boundary, and the southern halves of the eastern and western Project property boundaries. The lands owned by BOR and BLM are not intended to be developed on and shall remain open space, which contributes to the current visual character of the Project property. Off -Site Utility Field In addition to the 855-acre mixed -use development proposed as part of the Project, the Project includes the development of an off -site utility field consisting of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre IID substation. The exact locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located within a 2-mile radius east of the Project property, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west. Currently, the off -site locations are primarily characterized by vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land. The Project applicant will be required to purchase the off - site properties, once the locations have been determined. The off -site locations are illustrated in Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-5 October 2023 163 4.1 AESTHETICS 4.1.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Bureau of Land Management The United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages one in every 10 acres of land in the United States, and approximately 30 percent of the Nation's minerals. These lands and minerals are found in every state in the country and encompass forests, mountains, rangelands, arctic tundra, and deserts. In California, the BLM oversees 15 million acres of public lands in California, 47 million acres of subsurface mineral estate, and 1.6 million surface acres in northwestern Nevada. Federal Land Policy Management Act The Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) states that federal land should remain under federal ownership and established a regulatory system for the BLM to manage federal lands. The Act sets out a multiple use management policy for the BLM in which the agency would balance its management of the land to meet diverse needs, including recreation, grazing, timber and mineral production, fish and wildlife, protection, and oil and gas production. The BLM established the Visual Resource Management (VRM) program under FLPMA. The VRM establishes national consistency for inventorying, planning, and managing visual resources on BLM-managed lands. California Desert Conservation Area Plan The California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) is a 25-million-acre expanse of land in Southern California designated by Congress in 1976 through the FLPMA. The CDCA includes the Death Valley National Park to the north and extends south to the California -Mexico border. The goal of the CDCA Plan is to provide for the use of the public lands and resources, including economic, educational, scientific, and recreational uses, in a manner which enhances, whenever possible, the environmental, cultural, and aesthetic values of the Desert and its productivity. The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument is located within the CDCA. The CDCA implements the VRM program. Regional Riverside County Ordinance No. 655, Regulating Light Pollution Riverside County's Ordinance No. 655 is intended to restrict the permitted use of certain light fixtures emitting into the night sky undesirable light rays which have a detrimental effect on astronomical observation and research at Mount Palomar. Per this ordinance, outdoor light fixtures means outdoor artificial illuminating devices, installed or portable, used for flood lighting, general illumination or advertisement. Such devices shall include, but are not limited to, search, spot, and flood lights for: Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-6 October 2023 164 4.1 AESTHETICS Buildings and structures, Recreational facilities, Parking lots, Landscape lighting, - Outdoor advertising displays and other signs, Street lighting on private streets, and Walkway lighting As illustrated in Figure 4.4.1 of the Riverside County General Plan Environmental Impact Report (page 4.4-7), La Quinta lies within Zone B of the Palomar restricted nighttime light zone and must comply with the County standards. Riverside County General Plan The Multipurpose Open Space Element in the Riverside County General Plan (RCGP) discusses the preservation, use, and development of open space areas within the County. The Element also defines scenic vistas and corridors within the County. The following RCGP policies are related to open space and recreational areas, scenic vistas, and scenic corridors are provided below. Pnliriac- The following policies pertain to open space: OS 20.1 Preserve and maintain open space that protects County environmental resources and maximizes public health and safety in areas where significant environmental hazards and resources exist. OS 20.2 Prevent unnecessary extension of public facilities, services, and utilities, for urban uses, into Open Space -Conservation designated areas. (Al 74) The following policies pertain to parks and recreation: OS 20.3 Discourage the absorption of dedicated park lands by non -recreational uses, public or private. Where absorption is unavoidable, replace park lands that are absorbed by other uses with similar or improved facilities and programs. (Al 74) OS 20.4 Provide for the needs of all people in the system of County recreation sites and facilities, regardless of their socioeconomic status, ethnicity, physical capabilities or age. OS 20.5 Require that development of recreation facilities occurs concurrent with other development in an area. (Al 3) OS 20.6 Require new development to provide implementation strategies for the funding of both active and passive parks and recreational sites. (Al 3) Scenic Resources Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-7 October 2023 165 4.1 AESTHETICS Scenic resources are an important quality of life component for residents of the County. In general, scenic resources include areas that are visible to the general public and considered visually attractive. In addition to scenic corridors, described below, scenic resources include natural landmarks and prominent or unusual features of the landscape. For example, the Santa Rosa National Monument includes mountains or other natural features with high scenic value. Scenic backdrops include hillsides and ridges that rise above urban or rural areas or highways. Scenic vistas are points, accessible to the general public, that provide a view of the countryside. Following are policies to protect these resources and ensure that future development enhances them. Policies: OS 21.1 Identify and conserve the skylines, view corridors, and outstanding scenic vistas within Riverside County. (Al 79) Scenic Corridors Many roadway corridors in Riverside County traverse its scenic resources. Enhancing aesthetic experiences for residents and visitors to the County promotes tourism, which is important to the County's overall economic future. Enhancement and preservation of the County's scenic resources will require careful application of scenic highway standards along Official Scenic Routes. Policies that seek to protect and maintain resources in corridors along scenic highways are incorporated into this section. State and county eligible and designated scenic highways are included and mapped in the Circulation Element of the General Plan, as well as in the Circulation section of those area plans where scenic corridors are located. Also refer to the Scenic Corridor Sections of the Circulation and Land Use Elements. Policies: OS 22.1 Design developments within designated scenic highway corridors to balance the objectives of maintaining scenic resources with accommodating compatible land uses. (Al 3) OS 22.2 Study potential scenic highway corridors for possible inclusion in the Caltrans Scenic Highways Plan. OS 22.3 Encourage joint efforts among federal, state, and County agencies, and citizen groups to ensure compatible development within scenic corridors. OS 22.4 Impose conditions on development within scenic highway corridors requiring dedication of scenic easements consistent with the Scenic Highways Plan, when it is necessary to preserve unique or special visual features. (Al 3) Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-8 October 2023 166 4.1 AESTHETICS OS 223 Utilize contour grading and slope rounding to gradually transition graded road slopes into a natural configuration consistent with the topography of the areas within scenic highway corridors. (Al 3) Local La Quinta General Plan The La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) addresses various elements relevant to the growth of the community including elements specifically relevant to the aesthetic and visual character of the City in the Land Use, Livable Community, and the Open Space and Conservation Elements. The Land Use Element identifies areas planned for residential, commercial, and public uses, and provides the initial framework for the design aspects and allowed uses within the various planned areas. The Land Use Element ensures that conflicting uses are not located adjacent to or in proximity of each other, and outlines goals, policies, and programs within each land use category. The purpose of the Livable Community Element is to help the City build a more cohesive community through the conservation of resources, enhancement of the built environment, and improving the community's health. The Livable Community Element discusses community design which utilizes land use, and efficient building design to create a community that can sustain life. According to the Open Space and Conservation Element, some of the City's greatest assets are its scenic mountain vistas and wilderness areas. The Open Space Element helps to protect these and other assets by establishing policies and programs for their management and conservation to ensure the long-term viability of open space lands for resource conservation, public health and safety, recreation, and scenic enjoyment. Undeveloped open space areas located along the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains and their foothills constitute approximately half of the valuable biological, recreational, and scenic resources enjoyed by residents and visitors in the City of La Quinta. La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report According to the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR), the contrast between the flat desert landscape and the mountain peaks surrounding it provides views and picturesque landscapes for residents and visitors. Existing light and glare within the City is produced in areas such as the commercial centers along Highway 111, some residential developments such as PGA West and existing school playfields and recreational facilities, and major arterials. La Quinta Municipal Code The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) acts as a regulatory program with standards, compliant with state and federal laws, for the City of La Quinta. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-9 October 2023 167 4.1 AESTHETICS LQMC Section 9.100.150, Outdoor Lighting, is intended to provide standards for outdoor lighting which allow adequate energy efficient lighting for public safety while minimizing adverse effect of lighting, such as lighting which: • Has a detrimental effect on astronomical observations; and/or • Inefficiently utilizes scarce electrical energy; and/or • Creates a public nuisance or safety hazard. Per the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, exterior lighting shall comply with Section 9.100.150 of the LQMC, regulating outdoor light fixtures onsite. Lighting and photometric plans shall be approved with a Site Development Permit. General requirements include shielding, filtration, and height limitations. To summarize the ordinance, all exterior illuminating devices, except those cited as exempt, must be fully or partially shielded as required in the Municipal Code. Those outdoor lighting fixtures requiring a filter must be equipped with a filter consisting of glass, acrylic or translucent enclosure. Building -mounted lights must be installed below the eave line or below the top of wall if there are no eaves. Pole or fence - mounted decorative and landscape lights must be located no more than eight feet above grade. All exterior lighting must be located and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent properties. Prohibited lighting includes outdoor building and landscaping illumination that is unshielded and new mercury vapor installations. Title 9, Zoning, in the LQMC establishes standards and guidelines, such as limiting structure height and controlling building mass and scale, for various land uses within the City. The Title 9 Zoning code is intended to: • Provide and designate different land uses and structures in appropriate places in the General Plan, and to regulate such land uses and structures to serve the needs of residential, commercial, recreational, open space and other purposes. • Establish conditions which allow the various types of land uses to exist in harmony and to promote the stability of existing land uses by protecting them from harmful intrusion. • Prevent undue intensity of land development, avoid population overcrowding, maintain a suitable balance between developed land and open space, and protect the natural beauty of the City. The Specific Plan establishes design guidelines governing development within the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan also, as appropriate, incorporates by reference the requirements of the City's zoning code. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-10 October 2023 168 4.1 AESTHETICS 4.1.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance According to the CEQA Guidelines' Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to aesthetics are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated. Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Methodology Aesthetic Value and Quality The perception and uniqueness of scenic vistas and visual character can vary according to location and composition of its surrounding context. The subjective values attributed to views is generally affected by the presence and intensity of neighboring man-made improvements, such as structures, overhead utilities, and landscaping, often in relation to the aesthetic quality offered by a natural background that may include open space, mountain ranges, or a natural landmark feature. Although subjective depending on the individual's perspective, features such as overhead power lines, landscaping and additional improvements can impact the scenery of the area. The proximity and massing of structures, landscaping and other visual barriers interact with the visibility of surrounding environments to restrict or enhance the value of local characteristic views. The evaluation of scenic vistas takes into consideration the physical compatibility of proposed projects in relation to land uses, transportation corridors, or other vantage points, where the enjoyment of unique vistas may exist, such as residential areas or scenic roads. Aesthetic impacts are evaluated by considering proposed grading, landform alteration, berms for water tanks and other improvements, building setbacks, scale, massing, typical construction materials, and landscaping features associated with the design of the Project. The Project's impact on scenic vistas and the existing visual character are examined and assessed using the above criteria to determine whether development of the Project would have significant impacts on the surrounding Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-11 October 2023 169 4.1 AESTHETICS area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment ("Specific Plan Amendment" or "SPA"). The Specific Plan Amendment establishes design guidelines, development standards, and architectural features that contribute to the proposed aesthetic quality of the Project property, which are intended to integrate the Project with its natural surroundings. As discussed in the SPA, the proposed architectural color motif will be desert compatible, using a palette of earth tones. Further, as is described in the SPA the goal of the Travertine community is to blend into the natural desert surrounding through landscaping, choice of materials, and architectural design elements. The SPA is provided in this Draft EIR as Appendix A. Visual Simulations In order to analyze the Project's potential impacts to scenic vistas, visual character, and public views, visual simulations at twelve locations were prepared to illustrate the conditions before development of the Project, and the conditions after development of the Project. Locations were selected with community input and comprise points of greatest visibility of the Project to the public and surrounding residences. Locations 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 were chosen after a meeting with the residential and golf community, Trilogy, located east of the Project site. Trilogy is the closest residential community to the Project property. Although CEQA does not generally require that projects analyze private views (i.e., personal backyards), visual simulations from the Trilogy community are provided for informational purposes and considered in the aesthetics impacts analysis. Exhibit 4.1-4 provides a key map of the simulation locations from the 12 off -site locations. Exhibit 4.1-8 through Exhibit 4.1- 19 illustrates the views from the site locations, before Project development, and after Project development. In the "after" image, the red line indicates the projected profile of the Project property development within the SPA. Character and Development Standards The goal of the Project is to provide the highest quality residential and tourist commercial master planned community. The Project proposes five specific plan land uses, identified as Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Resort —Golf Club, Open Space Recreation, and Open Space Natural. The land use character within the Project property is intended to facilitate estate living, medium density villa -style life, and a resort/spa and tourist orientation. The proposed residential, resort, golf and open space land uses proposed for the Project property are typical land uses within the City of La Quinta, which includes various gated residential communities, golf club communities, and spa and resort facilities. The proposed land uses and planning areas are discussed below. Low Density Residential The Low Density Residential land use consists of Planning Areas 3-5, 7, 8, 10 and 12-16, and will be characterized by larger single-family detached residential lots (from 5,500 to 9,000 square feet or greater). These homes will have the largest setbacks in the development, as well as the smallest maximum lot coverage. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-12 October 2023 170 4.1 AESTHETICS Medium Density Residential The Medium Density Residential land use consists of Planning Areas 2, 6 and 9, located north of the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 spine road. This land use category will reflect the transition between the lower density golf, residential housing and open space development and the resort/spa development and will include single-family residential lots ranging from 4,000 to 5,775 square feet in size. Resort/Spa and Resort/Golf The proposed resort and golf club are proposed in Planning Areas 1 and 11. Planning Area 1 is located in the northern portion of the site and anticipated to provide 100-resort villas, wellness spa, and a main resort complex. The proposed villas will not exceed 28 feet in height (or 22 feet if adjacent to an image corridor), while the hotel buildings would not exceed 40 feet (or three stories) in height. Planning Area 11 is located in the southern portion of the site and anticipated to provide a golf training/practice facility with a golf academy, banquet facilities and a four -hole training golf course. Open Space — Recreation The Open Space Recreation land use category consists of Planning Areas 17, 18 and 19. Open Space Recreational land uses are proposed at the eastern Project property entry and areas south adjacent to Coral Mountain. Planning Areas 18 and 19 are situated at the eastern property entrance (Avenue 62) and would include parks, a retention basin, trails, and driving range. Planning Areas 18 and 19 would be the first planning area residents and visitors would see when entering the Project property. Planning Area 17 is situated at the northern boundary of the Project property and would consist of natural recreational uses, such as trails, due to its location on the southern portion of Coral Mountain. Open Space Natural/Restricted Planning Area 20 occupies approximately 301.2 acres of the southern portion of the Project property. Development is not proposed in this Planning Area other than the water tanks necessary for the Project property (discussed below). Similar to the Open Space Recreational planning areas, the Natural Open Space Planning Area will not develop buildings or structures and views of the natural landscape would be visible to the future residents and visitors of the Project property. Water Tanks In order to provide the site with an adequate amount of water and water pressure, the Project proposes the development of two CVWD water tanks, in the southwest portion of the Project property, and booster stations. The two water tanks, identified as the "upper" and "lower" tanks, will be situated in Planning Area 20, west of the Martinez Rockslide. The water reservoirs and associated booster stations are proposed to collect the well water and store it at elevation to provide the required water pressure for the property. The upper tank would be located at an elevation of 425 feet and would be 64 feet in diameter and 30 to 40 feet in height. I lower tank would be located at an Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-13 October 2023 171 4.1 AESTHETICS elevation of 335 feet and would be 110 feet in diameter and 30 to 40 feet in height. Both tanks would be shielded from public view by berms. Exhibits 4.1-2 and 4.1-3, below, illustrates the locations of the tanks, and the berms shielding the tanks. The proposed water tanks will be developed per CVWD's regulation and standards. Per CVWD's guidelines and direction, water reservoir structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height, unless required by CVWD. In addition, a paved all-weather access road will be installed along the western edge of the development for access to Section 5, as illustrated in the Circulation Plan in Exhibit 3-15, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. As depicted in Exhibit 3-15, the all-weather access road will branch off of the western loop road to the northwest edge of the Project property and will be defined as an easement to allow access from the Project property. The access road will be developed at the same time as the loop road is built. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-14 October 2023 172 Z*W. ............... Zt. Z-7 "MR71- ir7 _L 71 57 xi� * I � M RESERVOIR TANK ? 1 425 P.E. t t' ra p �r Rimervir T40 1 Din w.04 pt HoigM.;i- "tlFifi _F lVrrtlti�t�l S,ape JL R}as;�kgtr M�� 4fhf�hl 140T TO 8CAL E iource: TRG Land, Inc. I4aiiifal Oki 41. Ngt1jrA[ Rokd S'DVa a LI RESERVCgR TANK 2 � f 335 P.E_ I 1 I� I° I� Or TO SCAL e Rtservaii Tank 2 O•ra a 110A Neiyhlr 3Q,�� f♦ D*M Rwmrvhkr'011 oL Nalaral flmhr 335S MS-E wol MSA CONSULTING, IN C_ PROPOSED WATER TANK LOCATIONS } :I .7-NN .1.7 } ' iv; :,',�' 1• '• C. ?.I r. 1: •:' ,.a;1t1 vik-':. TRAVE I ZN E EXHIBIT+/ 1-3 4.1 AESTHETICS Off -Site Utility Field As stated in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, the Project will develop an off -site utility field consisting of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre IID substation. The exact locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located within a 2-mile radius northeast and east of the Project property. Exhibit 4.1-4 illustrates a programmatic image of the off -site utility field location. Wells Up to five off -site well sites are proposed as a part of Project development. The process for acquisition of well sites will be done by a private purchase by the landowner. This Draft EIR assesses the potential impacts of well development on a programmatic level. As specific well sites are purchased by the landowner, the sites will be ultimately dedicated to CVWD. Any unique conditions at selected well sites not covered by this Draft EIR, would then be covered by subsequent project -specific CEQA analysis. The wells and supporting infrastructure (i.e., fences/walls and gates) would be subject to approval by CVWD. According to CVWD's Design Manual, well sites shall be a minimum of 150 feet by 150 feet in dimension (0.50 acres), and 0.75 acres if there is an onsite detention basin system. Well sites typically include well heads and pumps, control equipment housing, etc. According to the CVWD well site checklist, the developer will be required to design and construct the well site improvements to include (1) grading of the site, (2) block walls, (3) water pipeline stubs, (4) power, (5) driveway and gates, (6) blow -off structure and piping, and (7) detention basin to be reviewed and approved by CVWD. Well site separation distances, established by CVWD, require well sites to be separated from a base of a mountain by 4,000 feet, existing well sites by 1,000 feet, seepage pit/cesspool/leach line or tank by 150 feet, sewer pipeline or sewer lateral by 50 feet, and sewer machine or sewer lift station by 100 feet. The area of the well site shall be a minimum of 0.5 acres or 0.75 acres with onsite retention basin. Block walls need to be 6 to 8 feet high depending upon surroundings. Six-foot walls require a landscape plan. Gates per CVWD should include two, 8-foot gates, and one, 3-foot man gate. The driveway must be concrete with a minimum approach distance of 20 feet long and extend 5 feet beyond gate areas into the well site. qi ihctatinn An off -site 2.5-acre substation will be required by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) to provide electricity service to the Project property. The substation will be constructed during the Construction Phase 1 stage. The location of the 2.5-acre site will be within 2 miles of the Project property. All potential off -site parcels required for the substation will be chosen to fit the requirements of IID and will be studied with metrics provided by the utility. Electricity infrastructure will be underground, apart from lines greater than 92 kV. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-17 October 2023 175 4.1 AESTHETICS A typical IID substation will range from 315 feet by 315 feet and will include lighting arresters, conductors, insulators, instrument transformers, electrical power transformers, relays, circuit breakers, bus bars, etc. The proposed substation will be designed in compliance with IID's site requirements (IID RGSTD-0001), which requires two 30-foot (width) access roads and fencing (either chain -link or block wall). Landscaping is allowed around substations; however, if proposed, they must include low -maintenance plants, and can include non -vegetative groundcovers (i.e., crushed rock, river rock, or compacted sand and rock). Plants must maintain a 52-inch minimum clearance from the fence, and trees shall be planted 12 feet from the fence. Trees are not allowed to be planted under or near transmission lines, distribution lines, or near poles or structures. Landscape plans must be submitted to IID engineering for approval. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-18 October 2023 176 N �! li`?, �� r! �='tom. �'c�.L�~�r��t'a�' �ti- +�i: h'� ��� •;". �- � . Yit � '�' Y • + � ' I } • '"�i •.. irr .. kaN���J••' _ I � - � ka Yul !f ? ANDAV&A CORAL CANYON - AAaevfa�n < =r7• (FUTURE) ;i;''� ��• l� County of Riverside ! TRAVERTINE I � r; -0 I • f,� 1 I Diko 4 Martinez ` y 7 ,:',�•.,.;C t Rock SWe f fl IL Q1 t t- I 4 T 1L' a - - ` THE QUARRY • ' LEGEND 0 Section Lines* 0 Utility Field 'The Public Land Survey System (PLSS) Section —one -square -mile block of land, containing 640 acres, or approximately 0 Section Line Numbers 0 City of La Quinta Boundary one thirty-sixth of a township. Due to the curvature of the Earth, sections may occasionally be slightly smaller than one square mile 0 Project Boundary Source: TRG Land, Inc. MSACONSULTINC I r . P RiOn RAMMATi C 0 FF-SITE I NFRAM UCTU R 6 MAP _ RAVER TINE EXPIGI3 4 1.4 If( Source: CVWD Well Sites MSA CONSULTING INC, TYPICAL WATER WELL EXAMPLES s t 4KH N;r _ - I'A N jN c P114r, ?, "il [no Y:.19-_, TRAVERTINE EXHIBIR.1-5 a, Alu ' -s„ i�4MJri 2�up 7i• I -opt �� �• ; �* � ~ � � I� i1 �.• • — _.} = L •ii�1�r- �� �. _l �� ��.� i f ��k ��� Y FIN . ul! AWr T , •,a k r M �' .� 4 x� I I moo ati• a L• -• �M.•� F • - . "�-.�i•[�5��'f?�:r: ��k��'!w �lJi��;a• i -'��' f' �' :F:'L: .•i ��'T}:.r�.:���:..^�� -�.�}� 4.1 AESTHETICS Project Architectural Design Elements The architectural character of the Project property will be maintained through the application of guidelines stipulated by the SPA. Massing and Scale The mass and scale of the proposed buildings will be proportionate to the lot size and compliant with setback requirements. Massing breaks will be accomplished through variable setbacks. Color The SPA Design Guidelines limit and control the use of architectural color motif at Travertine, which will be desert compatible, using a palette of earth tones. This palette will be complemented with a variety of accents, roof tones and textures, with complementary window moldings and architectural detailing. The predominantly earth tone structure colors will range from beiges, gray -green tones, mauves, whites, creams, tan, sand, light browns, and similar earth tones. Materials used will consist of stucco, rock facade, and tile. Fences and Walls Fences and walls will reflect the materials and design of the approved home fagade. The treatment of the wall will complement the architectural treatment of the residential building, or the walls and/or fences that are an integral part of the garden design. Walls and fences shall be kept as low as possible, not exceeding six feet above grade to avoid a "fortress" appearance. Appropriate materials include tube steel, river rock stone veneer, split face block and slumpstone block. Landscape Design Elements The primary purpose of the design guidelines for landscape architecture is to ensure that landscape treatments and materials utilized in Travertine will enhance the high -quality aesthetic impression to be achieved while also complementing the physical design and architectural features of the community. The proposed landscape elements are planned to accent entrances and soften hard surfaces and structures and will occur throughout the community and unite Travertine under a common design theme and plant palette. The Project property's plant palette identifies plants proposed to reinforce the community design character and compatibility with the surrounding natural open space. The experience of both arriving and leaving the Project property from the northern extension of Jefferson Street will be enhanced by the abundance of open space between the existing Dike No. 2 and the Quarry La Quinta, and the proposed resort/spa use in Planning Area 1. This area is currently defined by undeveloped open space. Generous setbacks are proposed along Jefferson Street and the edges of development. The proposed landscaping will complement the existing natural environment. Project Design Features Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-22 October 2023 180 4.1 AESTHETICS In order to reduce the temporary visual impacts of construction activities to scenic vistas, all construction equipment will be stored onsite within a designated area that is fenced with opaque construction fencing when not in use. Construction waste will be stored in an area that is accessible to weekly refuse pick up. All construction waste will be taken to a recycling center. Project Impacts According to the CEQA Guideline Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to aesthetic resources are significant environmental effects, the following thresholds are analyzed and evaluated. Would the Project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The topography of the region progresses from the flat desert floor, where La Quinta is located, to the dramatic mountain ranges that surround the area and provides valuable scenic vistas in the City. Specifically, the Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountain, and Martinez Rockslide provide scenic vistas in the southern portions of La Quinta, where the Project property is located. As previously stated in 4.1.2, Existing Conditions, the mountain ranges in this area vary from 400 feet to over 8,000 feet above sea level, creating panoramic views of the varying heights of the mountains. Views of the scenic vistas are available from off -site public roadways, including Avenue 62 and Madison Street. However, these views are somewhat obstructed by existing communities, farmland, landscaping, hedges, and perimeter walls. Additionally, Dike No. 4 obstructs views of the mountains depending on the closeness of the viewer to the Dike. The following discussion analyzes the Project site's potential impacts to the scenic resources (i.e., the surrounding mountain ranges) in the area. In order to analyze the potential impacts to scenic vistas, visual simulations at twelve locations were prepared to demonstrate where the proposed buildings would be located, and their visual impact from several locations north and east of the Project. Exhibit 4.1-7, provides a key map of the simulation locations from the twelve off -site locations. Exhibit 4.1-8 through Exhibit 4.1-19 illustrates the views from the off -site locations, before Project development, and after Project development. In the "after" image, the red line indicates the projected top of the Project property. Analysis and discussion are provided subsequently. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-23 October 2023 181 ArR"Iukb . . . ......... 161 40lb- Source: TRG Land, Inc. MSA'AONSULTING INC KEY MAP LOCATIONS �.N E Li-j i. "W�' ivi - =!Jf:-' IdU IPMQ'5:4ANU LJWl Hl-I'I 14,-1 TRAVE EXHIB I 11 -7 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 1 (Exhibit 4.1-8) Location 1 is located approximately 0.63 miles east of the property, on Avenue 62. At this location, the current scenic vista is defined by the Santa Rosa Mountains. A large hedge row on the south (left) side of the paved road (Avenue 62), distribution power poles, and block walls and vegetation to the north make up the surrounding area. Avenue 62 at this location lacks sidewalk, and curb and gutter improvements. Currently Dike No. 4 visually obstructs a portion of the Project property. The existing vegetation and infrastructure partially obstruct the views of the Santa Rosa Mountains at Location 1. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-8, the proposed development would result in the completion of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial with two lanes. The electric power poles will also be placed underground as a result of Project implementation and sidewalks with curb and gutter improvements would be constructed as part of Project development. Per the visual simulation, distant views of Project property structures and landscaping will be visible from Location 1. Views observed by motorists and pedestrians of the Santa Rosa Mountains will not be obstructed from Project development, when observed from Avenue 62 due to the size and massing of the Mountain. Impacts to the scenic vista will be less than significant at this location. Location 2 (Exhibit 4.1-9) Location 2 is located approximately 0.70 miles northeast of the property, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 60 and facing southwest. At this location, the scenic vista (i.e., the Santa Rosa Mountains) are partially obstructed by manmade development including distribution power poles, signage, and infrastructure indicating the end of Madison Street, as well as vegetation including shrubs and trees. Currently, Dike No. 4 obstructs views of and into the Project property. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-9, views of the proposed development would be completely obstructed from public view at this location. The existing CVWD Dike No. 4 obstructs potential views of the Project property from this location. As illustrated in the "after" image, the proposed Madison Street emergency vehicle access (EVA) route would be developed at this location. The Madison Street EVA will be gated and only accessible to emergency vehicles. As the visual simulation displays below, the development of the Madison Street EVA would not result in impacts to the scenic vista, as the mid- range and peak views remain visible at this location. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains would not be obstructed from motorists and pedestrians at this location. Development of the proposed Project would result in no impact to the scenic vista at this location. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-25 October 2023 183 MSA- CON SU [TIN G., INC. Source: TRG Land, Inc. LOCATION 1 TRAVERTINE EXH I B If � l -8 MSA. CON ill TIN G.. INC. LOCATION 2 TRAVERTINE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIPPl-9 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 3 (Exhibit 4.1-10) Location 3 is located approximately 0.40 miles north of the site, at the extension of Avenue 60. At this location, the scenic vista includes the Santa Rosa Mountains and Coral Mountain. Currently, views of these scenic vistas are obstructed by existing distribution power poles, and single family residential homes with perimeter landscaping. Additionally, Dike No. 4 visually dominates the viewshed and obstructs the Project property. The existing vegetation, structures, and infrastructure obstructs the base views of the Santa Rosa Mountains and Coral Mountain. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-10 ("after" simulation), the proposed Project property would be completely obstructed from public view at this location. (Note: As previously stated, the red line in the "after" image indicates the Project property profile.) Like Location 2, the existing CVWD berm entirely obstructs the Project property. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains would not be obstructed by the Project from motorists and pedestrians at this location. Therefore, development of the Project would not result in impacts to the scenic vistas at this location. Location 4 (Exhibit 4.1-11) Location 4 is a view looking southeast from the future Jefferson Street at the northwest Project property corner. At this location, the scenic vista includes the natural desert landscape and the Santa Rosa Mountains. Location 4 is currently viewed exclusively by hikers accessing the Boo Hoff Trail (west of the site) and south of the future Coral Canyon development. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-11, the proposed development would be visible on the left from this location. From Location 4, the paved extension of Jefferson Street will be developed during Project implementation, and the Project property structures, landscaping, and infrastructure visible at this location. However, the structures and landscaping are distant and their view across the landscape is diminished. The Project property partially obstructs the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains; however, a majority of the Mountain (mid -range and peaks) remain unobstructed. Additionally, the hikers traveling along the Boo Hoff Trail would be hiking south of the Project property and closer to the Mountains (between the Project property and the Santa Rosa Mountains). Therefore, development of the Project property would not obstruct views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the observers along the public viewshed. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-28 October 2023 186 - B'j�Jf 6 x a� �,} _ rs L•r .oFr A MSA. CON SUL.TIN 1 I LOCATION 3 mULMJrPrac.} iWI. =Uf:-1'4 G"dC• ;,N1�Y.l.'Uk_:1'�1�,-, TRAVEf TT NE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT 4.1-10 - �3erofo - AfTer UITI � LOCATION 4 MSA } }. TRAVERTINE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT W 11 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 5 (Exhibit 4.1-12) Location 5 is situated within the Trilogy La Quinta community, northeast of the Project property. At this location, the scenic vista is the mid -range and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The existing residential neighborhood in Trilogy La Quinta, as well as Dike No. 4, which dominates the foreground, obstructs the base and partial mid -range views of the Mountains. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-12, the proposed development would not be visible at Location 5. Therefore, the Project would not impact the scenic vista viewed at this location. Location 6 (Exhibit 4.1-13) Similar to Location 5, Location 6 is situated within the Trilogy La Quinta community. This location lies approximately 0.50 miles east of the Project property, and approximately 0.20 miles north of the proposed Madison Street emergency vehicle access (EVA) route, proposed during Project construction. At this location, the scenic vista is the mid -range and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The existing residential neighborhood in Trilogy La Quinta, as well as Dike No. 4, which dominates the foreground, obstructs the base and partial mid -range views of the Mountain. The peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible from this viewpoint. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-13, the Project property would not be visible at Location 6. Therefore, the Project would not impact the scenic vista viewed at this location. Location 7 (Exhibit 4.1-14) Location 7 is located at the southern golf course hole within the Trilogy La Quinta community. This location lies north of Avenue 62. At this location, the scenic vista includes the peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains and the mid -range and peak views of the Martinez Rockslide. The scenic vistas at this location are partially obstructed by the existing landscape, block walls, and Dike No. 4. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-14, the westerly extension of Avenue 62 (crossing over Dike No. 4) would be visible at this location. However, even with the Avenue 62 extension, mid -range and peak views of the Martinez Rockslide and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains would remain visible. Therefore, Project development would result in less than significant impacts to the scenic vistas viewed at this location. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-31 October 2023 189 - B@farR - lifter MSA- CONSULTI I � I LOCATIOT N 5 }; iVl ' Ur'•1 liH 1 DQj(_4 w!'kiR?�LIU ,=-, I���, TRAVE�E Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT 2 w- - After MSA. CON SU LTI N G. I Ni C'. LOCATION 6 J N, IN I G i v I -.— U G 1 '4 F- - G " d-7- *-�;- %; TRAVERTINE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT �W-1 3 IM APO,- MSA-CONSULTING IN(-. LOCATION 71 TRAVE N E Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT �4 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 8 (Exhibit 4.1-15) Location 8 is located at the southern golf course hole within the Trilogy La Quinta community. This Location lies north of Avenue 62. At this Location, the scenic vista includes the Santa Rosa Mountains, where the base views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are obstructed by the existing residential neighborhood in Trilogy, landscaping, and Dike No. 4. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-15, the westerly extension of Avenue 62 (crossing over Dike No. 4) would be visible at this location. However, even with the Avenue 62 extension, mid -range and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains would remain visible. Therefore, Project development would result in less than significant impacts to the scenic vistas viewed at this location. Location 9 (Exhibit 4.1-16) Location 9 is located at east of Dike No. 4, and the northwestern side of Trilogy, overlooking a golf course tee -off location. At this location, the scenic vista is the mid -range and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The existing Dike No. 4, Trilogy golf course, landscaping, and block walls obstruct the base and the lower mid -range views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-16, landscaping is proposed between the existing block wall and Dike No. 4, however, the Project property would not be visible at Location 9. Therefore, the residential and resort structures proposed for the Project property would not impact the scenic vista viewed at this location. The Project proposes to downgrade Madison Street from a Secondary Arterial (four -lane undivided roadway with 102-foot ROW) and remove it from General Plan Circulation Map. The extension of Madison Street will be utilized as an emergency vehicle access (EVA) route. Although the Madison Street extension would require development of the roadway to accommodate emergency vehicles, once the street is completed, it would be the same visually as current (pre -construction) conditions, apart from some additional landscaping. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-16. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-35 October 2023 193 MSS O ULTIIN(-. LOCATION 8 TRAVE �N E Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT -15 0 P� Af' 1-f ry A.P r i Wl. d-1 Ar M. MSA- CON Sill T1 N G., INC. LOCATION 9 2,;', -1-.— ivi TRAVERTINE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBITW-16 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 10 (Exhibit 4.1-17) Location 10 is located at the intersection of the Boo Hoff Trail and the Guadalupe Dike, northwest of the Project property. At this location, the scenic vista is the foothills of the Coral Mountains, and distant views of the Martinez Rockslide. The Little San Bernardino Mountains and the Mecca Hills are also distant in the background. The foreground is largely dominated by desert landscape. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-17, the southerly extension of Jefferson Street crosses the Guadalupe Dike and the Project property resort, as well as landscaping can be observed in the distance. The resort structures obstruct the base views of the Martinez Rockslide; however, mid -range and peak views of the Martinez Rockslide are visible from this location. Views of Coral Mountain, Little San Bernardino Mountains, and Mecca Hills are unchanged with the development of the Project. The Project would result in less than significant impacts to the views of Coral Mountains, Martinez Rockslide, Little San Bernardino Mountains, and Mecca Hills when observed from this location on the Boo Hoff Trail. Location 11 (Exhibit 4.1-18) Location 11 is located at the Boo Hoff Trail staging area, west of the Project property (reference Exhibit 4.1-7, Key Map Locations). At this location, the scenic vista is the peak of Coral Mountains, and distant views of the Little San Bernardino Mountains in the background (approximately 14 miles to the northeast). The foreground is largely dominated by natural desert landscape. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-18, the Project property is not visible at this location due to the staging area's location behind the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Therefore, the Project would not result in an impact to the scenic vista at this location. Location 12 (Exhibit 4.1-19) Location 12 is situated at the Avenue 62 entrance, crossing Dike No. 4, facing west towards the Project property. The Santa Rosa Mountain is the prominent scenic vista at this location. Natural desert landscaping, electric power poles, and utility easement are other visual features that make up this area. It should be noted that this location is currently not a public viewshed location. The Dike is closed to public access and, therefore, impacts to this viewpoint are not required to be analyzed under CEQA. However, an analysis of this location is included for informational purposes only. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-19, development of the Project site will include a paved roadway, crossing the Dike. Open space areas, residential structures, and resort/golf structures are illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-19. The Project property would introduce development into an undeveloped desert area, but due to the massing and scale of the Santa Rosa Mountains, as well as the architectural design of development and landscaping within the SPA, the Project would not significantly obstruct or create a significant contrast with the scenic vista. Base views, mid -range views, and peak views of the Mountain remain visible at this location. Therefore, the Project would not result in a potentially significant impact to the scenic vista at this location. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-38 October 2023 196 hop WL - ... ..... ..... -adpI 41 RL MSA. CON Sill T1 N G.. INC. LOCATION 10 ivi :: I '- ' ! I ! TRAVERTINE - Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBITF-17 ;p -CP p &6- MORI,- 7�- _--1 let., A"' Ohl a •-r .. , 'wo"k. . MSA. CON Sill T1 N G.. INC, LOCATION 11 TRAVERTINE Source: TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBIT Vf-18 J -7i LL M. 4k 4r MSA- CON Sill TI N G., INC, Source: TRG Land, Inc. LOCATION 12 TRAVERTINE EXHIBITW-19 4.1 AESTHETICS Water Tanks The two water tanks will be situated in Planning Area 20, west of the Martinez Rockslide. The water tanks and associated booster stations are proposed to collect the well water and store it at an elevation to provide the required water pressure for the site. The upper tank would be located at an elevation of 425 feet and would be 64 feet in diameter and 30 to 40 feet in height. The lower tank would be located at an elevation of 335 feet and would be 110 feet in diameter and 30 to 40 feet in height. Both tanks would be shielded from public view by berms (as illustrated in Exhibits 4.1-2 and 4.1-3, above). The proposed water tanks will be developed per CVWD's regulation and standards. Per CVWD's guidelines and direction, water reservoir structures shall not exceed 50 feet in height, unless required by CVWD. Since the proposed water tanks will be shielded by a berm, it will not be visible to the public and will not result in impacts to the scenic vista. Project Construction Temporary construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to the scenic vistas in Locations 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11. The Project property is shielded from public view at these locations due to the placement of Dike No. 4. Therefore, construction of the property would not impact the scenic vistas observed at these locations. However, construction of the Project may briefly impact views of the scenic vistas at Locations 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10 due to the construction of Avenue 62, crossing over the Dike (Locations 7 and 8), the construction of Madison Avenue as an EVA (Location 9), and the Jefferson Street extension (Locations 4 and 10). The construction of the westerly extension of Avenue 62 would be visible from the south golf course within the Trilogy residential and golf community, while the construction of the southerly extension of Madison Street would be visible from locations within the Trilogy community due to their adjacency to the Madison Street extension. The construction of the Madison EVA and the Jefferson Street extension may result in temporary visual contrast with the surrounding scenic vistas, however, due to the mass and scale of the surrounding mountain ranges, views of Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide, and panoramic views of the Santa Rosa Mountains would remain visible to the residents of Trilogy and hikers along public trails. Construction phase impacts are not expected to be significant with the implementation of best management construction practices, and in particular, in order to reduce the temporary visual impacts of construction activities to scenic vistas, all construction equipment will be stored onsite within a designated area that is fenced with opaque construction fencing when not in use. Construction waste will be stored in an area that is accessible to weekly refuse pick up. All construction waste will be taken to a recycling center. Additionally, as noted above, any visual contrast caused by construction activities would be temporary. Off -Site Utility Field Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-42 October 2023 200 4.1 AESTHETICS Development of the off -site utility field will consist of five well sites and a 2.5-acre electrical substation. These facilities will be constructed in compliance with CVWD standards for the well sites, and IID standards for the substation and are described below, with photos of typical CVWD well and IID substations. Fencing or walls around these sites, as well as other features, such as landscaping, will be incorporated into these infrastructure sites in coordination with CVWD and IID. The fencing/walls and landscape will act to prohibit trespassing and, along with perimeter landscaping, will create a visual barrier from the infrastructure. The potential effects associated with the IID substation are substantially greater than those expected at future CVWD well sites. The precise locations of the offsite utility field have not been determined at the time this EIR was written; however, a general area within a 2-mile radius of the Project property has been evaluated to determine the offsite utility field's impact on the scenic vista, which in this area, includes the Santa Rosa Mountains. Depending on the location of the off -site improvements, the development of the utilities, particularly the IID substation, may result in a visual obstruction to the scenic vistas observed along the public roadways, if located adjacent to a public right-of-way. According to IID's site requirements for distribution substations, substations are a minimum of 315 feet by 315 feet, which is exclusively for electrical purposes. Setbacks, rights -of -way, sidewalks, berms, catch basins, etc., should be located outside of this area. Typically, substation facilities include lighting arresters, conductors, insulators, instrument transformers, electrical power transformers, relays, circuit breakers, bus bars, etc. Substation facilities include large transmission poles and electric lines that are visually noticeable, especially in a rural context where development does not camouflage facilities. The proposed substation would be located within a rural context within the City that is characterized by agricultural land and vacant lots. The agricultural fields consist of date palm groves, and low -growing grasses or produce. Transmission and distribution lines are typically located adjacent to the public roadways. Distribution lines from the substation to the respective customer locations will be installed underground, while transmission lines from existing substations to the new substation will be aboveground. Once the substation is established, all distribution facilities will be via underground conduit systems and within existing rights -of -way. The proposed substation will be designed in compliance with IID's site requirements (IID RGSTD- 0001), which requires two 30-foot (width) access roads and fencing (either chain -link or block wall). Landscaping is allowed around substations; however, if proposed, they must include low - maintenance plants, and can include non -vegetative groundcovers (i.e., crushed rock, river rock, or compacted sand and rock). Plants must maintain a 52-inch minimum clearance from the fence, and trees shall be planted 12 feet from the fence. Trees are not allowed to be planted under or near transmission lines, distribution lines, or near poles or structures. The new substation will be required to comply with setback requirements for utility infrastructure and design features, such as landscaping and materials used, which reduces the impact of the utilities to less than significant levels regarding their impact to scenic vistas. For example, the use of exposed Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-43 October 2023 201 4.1 AESTHETICS metal which can be shiny, and block wall perimeters and decorative landscaping along the substation frontage would reduce visual impacts of the utility field. The proposed off -site substation will be reviewed by IID to ensure that the substation is developed to IID's standards. Although electrical substations consist of elements that are noticeable within a rural context, the potential impact of the substations to scenic vistas can be reduced to less than significant levels with the close coordination with IID to ensure setbacks requirements and proposing more subtle materials used, perimeter barriers, and landscaping. In addition to utility setback from roads and adjacent properties, the off -site utility field will be located within a two-mile radius of the Project property in areas northeast and east of the Project property boundaries. Thus, the utility field will be located a greater distance from the scenic vistas, which includes the mountain ranges along the City's western and southern boundary (i.e., Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountain, Martinez Rockslide). The utility field location will be more than 1.5 miles northeast of the Martinez Rockslide landform and the Santa Rosa Mountains. The massing and scale of the existing scenic vistas generate panoramic views throughout south La Quinta. As stated throughout this discussion, well sites are typically a minimum of 150 feet by 150 feet in dimension (0.50 acres) and 0.75 acres (if there is an onsite detention basin system) and surrounded by block walls; while substations are typically surrounded by fencing to deter trespassing and vegetation to shield the substation equipment from public viewsheds. The scale of the well sites and substation would not result in significant impacts to the scenic vista since the scale of the Santa Rosa Mountains is much larger than the proposed off -site utilities, with a mass that extends in height and width to create panoramic views throughout the southern boundaries of La Quinta. Overall, the construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to scenic vistas since the Project is located in an isolated area of La Quinta, separated by most public viewsheds by Dike No. 4. Construction impacts would be temporary and less than significant with implementation of best management practices. With the foregoing, development of the proposed Project, and the off -site utility field will result in less than significant impacts to scenic vistas. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The State Scenic Highway Program preserves and protects scenic State highway corridors from changes which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. Existing qualified scenic State highways in the Coachella Valley include Route 62 and Highway 111 from Bombay Beach in Salton Sea State Park to Route 195 near Mecca and from Route 74 (near Palm Desert) to Interstate 10 (near Whitewater) are both eligible scenic highways but are not "officially designated." There are no State or locally designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the Project property, accordingly the Project will not result in potentially significant impacts to scenic highways. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-44 October 2023 202 4.1 AESTHETICS C. In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? As previously stated in Section 4.1.2, Existing Conditions, the Project property exists in a rural (non - urbanized) context. Rural and suburban uses exist beyond Dike No. 4 to the north and east. These areas consist of agricultural and vacant lots, and residential communities, including Trilogy La Quinta, a residential and golf course community. The existing visual character of the Project property is defined as vacant and being both disturbed and undisturbed, when viewed from within the Project property. The disturbed area includes approximately 220 acres of abandoned vineyard. When viewed from the public viewsheds (i.e., roadways including Avenue 62, Madison Street, Monroe Street, and Jefferson Street), the Project property is obstructed by existing manmade facilities, such as Dike No. 4, existing residential communities, and perimeter landscaping (see discussion a). The existing visual character of the areas surrounding the Project property includes low density residential gated communities, vacant land, and agricultural land. Features that attribute to the visual character in the surrounding area includes block walls surrounding residential communities, low profile homes, landscaping, electric power poles along roadways, paved and unpaved streets, and CVWD Dike No. 4. The Project's primary community development area will range in elevations from approximately 60 to 240 feet above sea level. The planned water reservoirs sites occur at elevations of 425 and 330 feet above sea level, at the southwest corner of the Project property, west of the Martinez Rockslide, which is approximately 560 feet above sea level east of the Project property boundary. The Martinez Rockslide would act as a physical barrier to the water reservoirs when viewed from the valley floor, since the reservoirs will be approximately 135 feet lower than the peak of the Martinez Rockslide landform. Additionally, the reservoirs will be shielded by landscaped berms, which will screen them from public view. The following discussion analyzes the Project's potential impacts to the existing visual character of the area. In order to analyze the potential impacts the visual simulations analyzed in discussion a) were utilized to demonstrate where the proposed buildings would be located, and their visual impact from the several locations around the Project property. Exhibit 4.1-7 provides a key map of the simulation locations from the twelve offsite locations. Exhibit 4.1-8 through Exhibit 4.1-19 illustrates the views and visual character from the twelve viewpoints, before Project development, and after Project development. Location 1 (Exhibit 4.1-8) Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-45 October 2023 203 4.1 AESTHETICS At Location 1, the current visual character is defined by a large hedge row on the south (left) side of the paved road (Avenue 62), block walls and landscaping indicating the southern perimeter of the Trilogy residential community, and overhead distribution power poles. Avenue 62 at this location lacks sidewalk, and curb and gutter improvements. Currently Dike No. 4 visually obstructs a portion of the Project property. The Santa Rosa Mountains are located in the background of the exhibit. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-8, the proposed development would result in the completion of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial with two lanes. The electric power poles will also be placed underground as a result of Project implementation. Per the visual simulation, Project property rooftops and landscaping will be visible to from Location 1; however, these views are distant. Impacts to visual character will be less than significant at this location. Location 2 (Exhibit 4.1-9) As previously stated in discussion a), Location 2 is located approximately 0.70 miles northeast of the site, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 60 and looking southwest. At this location, the current character is defined by manmade development including distribution power poles, signage, and infrastructure indicating the end of Madison Street, as well as vegetation including shrubs and trees. Currently, Dike No. 4 obstructs views of and into the Project property at Location 2. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-9, the proposed development would be completely obstructed from public view at this location. The existing CVWD dike as well as the slopes of Coral Mountain obstructs potential views of the Project property from this location. Therefore, the Project would not impact the visual character of the surrounding area. Location 3 (Exhibit 4.1-10) As stated in discussion a), Location 3 is located approximately 0.40 miles north of the Project property, at the extension of Avenue 60. At this location, the current character is defined by the unpaved road, Avenue 60, distribution power poles, single family residential homes with perimeter landscaping, vacant land, and Dike No. 4. Currently, Dike No. 4 visually dominates the character and obstructs the Project property from public view. Therefore, Project development would not result in impacts to the visual character at this location because it is obstructed from public view by Dike No. 4. Location 4 (Exhibit 4.1-11) Location 4 is a view looking southeast from the future Jefferson Street at the northwest Project property corner. At this location, the current visual character is defined by the vacant and undeveloped land. Distant views of the abandoned agricultural use can just be seen from this location. Location 4 is currently viewed exclusively by hikers accessing the Boo Hoff Trail (west of the site). As shown in Exhibit 4.1-8, the paved extension of Jefferson Street, Project property structures, landscaping, and infrastructure would be developed and visible at this location. However, the Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-46 October 2023 204 4.1 AESTHETICS structures and landscaping are distant and their view across the landscape is diminished. Therefore, impacts to visual character will be less than significant at this location. Location 5 (Exhibit 4.1-12) Location 5 is situated within the Trilogy community, northeast of the Project property. At this location, the visual character is defined by the existing residential neighborhood in Trilogy La Quinta, as well as Dike No. 4 which dominate the foreground. The upper slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible from this viewpoint. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-12, the Project property would not be visible at Location 5. Therefore, the Project would not impact the visual character at this location. Location 6 (Exhibit 4.1-13) Similar to Location 5, the visual character at Location 6 is defined by the Trilogy residential community and Dike No. 4. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-13, the Project property would not be visible at Location 6. Therefore, the Project would not impact the visual character viewed at this location. Location 7 (Exhibit 4.1-14) Location 7 is located at the southern golf course hole within the Trilogy community, north of Avenue 62. At this location, the visual character is defined by the existing Trilogy golf course, landscaping, block walls, and Dike No. 4. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-14, the westerly extension of Avenue 62 over the Dike, would be visible at Location 7. As discussed above, CEQA does not require an analysis of impacts to private views (i.e., personal backyards, private golf courses). This visual simulation is, therefore, provided for informational purposes. The Project would introduce a raised roadway where one did not exist before. Accordingly, the Project would impact the surrounding visual character. However, due to the scale and massing and proximity of the mountains, the roadway is not expected to result in a potentially significant impact to the surrounding visual character. Moreover, by extending Avenue 62, the Project is implementing the approved Circulation Element of the La Quinta General Plan. Location 8 (Exhibit 4.1-15) Location 8 is located at the southern golf course hole within the Trilogy community, north of Avenue 62. As with Location 7, this view is from a private development and impacts to private views are not within CEQA's purview. However, this discussion is provided for informational purposes. At this location, the visual character is defined by the existing Trilogy golf course, landscaping, block walls, and Dike No. 4. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-15, the westerly extension of Avenue 62 over the Dike, would be visible at Location 8. This is necessary infrastructure to provide access to the Project property. Although the Avenue 62 extension will be visible from the southern boundary of Trilogy, due to the scale and massing and proximity of the mountains, the roadway is not expected to result in a potentially significant impact to the surrounding visual character. Moreover, by extending Avenue 62, the Project is implementing the approved Circulation Element of the La Quinta General Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-47 October 2023 205 4.1 AESTHETICS Location 9 (Exhibit 4.1-16) Location 9 is located east of Dike No. 4, at the northwestern side of Trilogy, overlooking a golf course tee -off location. At this location, the current visual character is defined by the existing Dike No. 4, golf tee -off location, landscaping, and block walls. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-16, landscaping is proposed between the existing block wall and Dike No. 4, however, the proposed development would not be visible at Location 9. Therefore, the residential and resort structures proposed for the Project would not impact the visual character at this location. The Project proposes the extension of Madison Street to be utilized as an emergency vehicle access (EVA) route. Although the Madison Street EVA extension would require development of the roadway to accommodate emergency vehicles, once the street is completed, it would be similar visually to current (pre -construction) conditions, apart from some additional landscaping. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-16. Additionally, this Project proposes to downgrade Madison Street from a Secondary Arterial (four -lane undivided roadway with 102-foot ROW) and remove it from General Plan Circulation Map. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Location 10 (Exhibit 4.1-17) Location 10 is located at the intersection of the Boo Hoff Trail and the Guadalupe Dike, northwest of the Project property. The visual character at this location is characterized by desert landscape (i.e., shrubs) and Guadalupe Dike. As shown in Exhibit 4.1-17, the Project will result in the southerly extension of Jefferson Street, crossing over the Guadalupe Dike, the development of residential and resort structures, and the placement of landscaping. At this location, Project property buildings are distant and generate low -profile buildings. Although the Project property will be visible this location, the low -profile structures proposed for the Project property are typical of existing communities in the City of La Quinta, therefore, impacts to the visual character will not be significant. Location 11 (Exhibit 4.1-18) Location 11 is located at the Boo Hoff Trail staging area, west of the Project property. Similar to Location 10, at this location, the Project property visual character is defined by natural desert landscaping. As stated in discussion a), the Project property is visually obstructed at this location due to the staging area's location behind the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Therefore, development of the Project would not result in impacts to the visual character viewed from this location. Location 12 (Exhibit 4.1-19) Location 12 is situated at the proposed Avenue 62 entrance, crossing over Dike No. 4. The visual character at this location is largely defined by the natural desert landscape (i.e., shrubs, trees), electric power poles, and utility easement. It should be noted that this location is currently not publicly accessible, and impacts to views from this location are not required to be analyzed under CEQA. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-48 October 2023 206 4.1 AESTHETICS Access to the Dike is private and transient people walking along the Dike is considered trespassing. However, analysis of the visual character at this location is included for informational purposes. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-19, development of the Project site will consist of residential and resort structures, and the placement of landscaping throughout. At this location, Project structures are distant and low -profile. Although the Project will be visible this location, the low -profile structures proposed for the Project are typical of existing communities in the City of La Quinta, therefore, impacts to the visual character will not be significant. Water Tanks As stated in discussion a), two CVWD water tanks are proposed in Planning Area 20, in order to provide the property with an adequate amount of water and water pressure. The two water tanks, identified as the "upper" and "lower" tanks, will be situated in Planning Area 20, west of the Martinez Rockslide. As previously determined, both tanks would be shielded from public view by berms, as illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-3 and 4.1-4. Since the water tanks will not be viewed by the public due to its location behind Martinez Rockslide and a berm, the proposed water tanks will not result in impacts to the visual character in the surrounding area. Summary of Viewshed Visual Character Analysis As determined in the analysis of views at locations 1 through 12, development of the proposed Project will not significantly impact the visual character of the surrounding area. The Project property is located in an isolated area of southern La Quinta, that is obstructed from public view by Dike No. 4. The westerly extension of Avenue 62, which crosses over Dike No. 4, will be visible from some locations within the southern side of Trilogy. The development of Project access will include a retaining wall on the north and south side to support the road as it crosses Dike No. 4. Furthermore, guard rails are proposed to provide safety for drivers and pedestrians that are located wherever the road is elevated above the minimum height to require such measures. The road will ascend roughly 800 feet east of the Dike and crest the Dike approximately 6 feet above grade. Additionally, the SPA design guidelines ensure that the visual character in the Project property is not impacted significantly by the proposed development. Within the proposed development and west of Dike 4, the various project frontages, including entrances and approaches, Planning Area entries, etc., will be improved during Project development with native and other desert -compatible landscaping materials, paved pedestrian sidewalks, and signed entry points. The Project property and its frontages and "edges" will be designed to complement the natural and existing environment by utilizing a color palette of earth tones, materials that can withstand the desert environment, and landscaped features. The earth tones proposed in the color palette includes beiges, gray -greens, mauves, whites, creams, tan, sand, light browns, etc. The materials will include stucco, rock fagade, tile, and other materials resistant to the desert environment. Edge conditions will include desert landscaping, and a band of transitional landscape planting with native plant reseeding and native tree planting. The proposed colors, building Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-49 October 2023 207 4.1 AESTHETICS materials, and landscaping will act together to blend the community in to the natural desert surrounding the Project property. The Project property's proposed color palette, materials and landscaping are typical in the Coachella Valley and the City of La Quinta, where buildings are developed not only to complement the natural environment, but also develop buildings and plant landscaping that will withstand the desert climate. Exhibits 3.1 through 3.8 in the Travertine SPA illustrates the proposed residential buildings. The exhibit below illustrates the wall plan proposed for the Project property (see Exhibit 4.1-20, Overall Wall Plan). The Travertine SPA is included in the appendices of this Draft EIR as Appendix A. The Project's design features along the Project property frontage will complement the existing natural visual character. In addition to the proposed Project color palette, materials, landscape design, and perimeter walls, the Project property's building heights and setbacks as established in the Travertine SPA will ensure that the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the City. The Project's residential structures or resort villas are not proposed to exceed two stories, which will help avoid large massing and building scale inconsistent with existing residential and resort communities in the City. The hotel/commercial portion of the Project property would not exceed three stories. Both the residential or commercial uses do not exceed the heights allowed in Chapter 9.50 and 9.90 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, respectively. Therefore, impacts to the visual character will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-50 October 2023 208 W-XL I FIE FEN ',VR7YA.'? 4 A "C94 � i4f!P I --j I I- NcI -= C-i- AL COM MV a Ct- j%'r-M , , f C3-1 - I OY -.KA 11% 1! ,q P I ly. I I q +00. AL Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, TIRG Land, Inc., HSA Design Group MSA-CONSULTING INC. OVERALL WALL PLAN m LILAPJHIN,r iwl. F!Y:-' IdU PMQ -5:;AMU TRAVERTINE EXHIBITf20 4.1 AESTHETICS Project Construction Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not result in impacts to the visual character in the area when viewed from Locations 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11. The Project property is hidden from public view at these locations due to the placement of Dike No. 4. Therefore, construction of the site would not impact the visual character observed from these public viewsheds. However, construction of the Project site may temporarily impact the visual character at Locations 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10 due to the construction of Avenue 62, crossing over the Dike (Locations 7 and 8), the construction of Madison Avenue as an EVA (Location 9), and the Jefferson Street extension (Locations 4 and 10). The construction of the westerly extension of Avenue 62 would be visible from the southern golf course within the Trilogy residential and golf community, while the construction of the southerly extension of Madison Street would be visible from locations within the Trilogy community due to their adjacency to the Madison Street extension. The EVA would only be used for emergency access. Moreover, the extension of Jefferson Street would be visible from the public trail (Boo Hoff Trail). The construction of these roadways may result in impacts to the visual character. In order to reduce the temporary visual impacts of construction activities to scenic vistas, all construction equipment will be stored onsite within a designated area that is fenced with opaque construction fencing when not in use. Construction waste will be stored in an area that is accessible to weekly refuse pick up. All construction waste will be taken to a recycling center. Overall, these impacts would be limited to private views and would be temporary. Off -Site Utility Field Development of the off -site utility field will consist of five well sites and a 2.5-acre electrical substation. These facilities will be constructed in compliance with CVWD standards for the well sites, and IID standards for the substation and are described above with photos of typical CVWD well and IID substations. At the time this EIR was written, the precise locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined. However, the area within a two-mile radius, which include agricultural lots and vacant lots have been evaluated on a programmatic level to analyze their impact to the visual character. Depending on the location of the off -site utility field, the development of the utilities, particularly the IID substation, may result in impacts to the visual character of the area. Fencing or walls around the off -site utility field, as well as other features, such as landscaping, will be incorporated into these infrastructure sites in coordination with CVWD and IID. The fencing/walls and landscape will act to prohibit trespassing and, along with perimeter landscaping, will create a visual barrier from the infrastructure. The potential effects associated with the IID substation are substantially greater than those expected at future CVWD well sites. As previously determined, IID establishes site requirements for distribution substations. IID requires substations to be a minimum of 315 feet by 315 feet, which is exclusively for electrical purposes. Setbacks, rights -of -way, sidewalks, berms, catch basins, etc., should be located outside of this area. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-52 October 2023 210 4.1 AESTHETICS Typically, substation facilities include lighting arresters, conductors, insulators, instrument transformers, electrical power transformers, relays, circuit breakers, bus bars, etc. Substation facilities include large transmission poles and electric lines that are visually noticeable, especially in a rural context where development does not camouflage facilities. The proposed substation would be located within a rural context within the City that is characterized by agricultural and vacant lots. The agricultural fields consist of date palm groves, and low -growing grasses, and produce. Transmission and distribution lines are typically located adjacent to the public roadways. The new substation would result in a visual change to the existing visual character of the rural portion of the City. However, the new substation will be required to comply with setback requirements for utility infrastructure and design features, such as landscaping and materials used, reduces the impact of the utilities to less than significant levels regarding their impact to scenic vistas and the surrounding visual character. For example, the use of exposed metal which can be shiny, and block wall perimeters and decorative landscaping along the substation frontage would reduce visual impacts of the utility field. Although electrical substations consist of elements that are noticeable within a rural context, the potential impact of the substations can be reduced to less than significant levels with the close coordination with IID to ensure that impacts are avoided and minimized to the greatest degree practicable by proposing more subtle materials used, perimeter barriers, and landscaping. Additionally, distribution lines extending from the proposed substation will be installed underground within existing rights -of - way. Transmission lines will be above ground and connect the new substation to existing facilities. The proposed Project's off -site substation will be reviewed by IID to ensure that the substation is developed to IID's standards. Construction of the off -site utility field would result in less than significant impacts to the existing visual character with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1, which requires the use of one or more of the following or comparable techniques: perimeter barriers, landscaping appropriate for the substation facility, non -reflective surfaces, and dulling finishes to help blend the structures with the surroundings. Overall, the construction and operation of the proposed Project site and off -site utility field would not result in significant impacts to visual character since the Project is in an isolated area of La Quinta, separated by most public viewsheds by Dike No. 4. Construction impacts would be temporary, and construction of the off -site utilities would be required to comply with CVWD and IID standards regarding water well and substation design (respectively) to reduce impacts to scenic vistas. Impacts to the visual character would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed Project property occurs on approximately 855 acres of vacant land, approximately 220 acres of which was previously operated as a vineyard. The Project property does not currently have Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-53 October 2023 211 4.1 AESTHETICS existing sources of fixed or non -fixed lighting. Presently, existing sources of fixed nighttime lighting in the Project property vicinity is associated with existing residential areas located approximately 0.75 miles north, and approximately 0.25 miles east of the Project property boundaries (measured from the northern -most and eastern -most boundaries of the property, respectively). Typical residential home lighting consists of low -intensity, wall -mounted, downward -oriented fixtures in the patio, side, and front yards of homes. Additional lighting associated with the residential areas includes safety and accent illumination for the parking lot, walkways, landscaping, golf courses and service areas. Street lighting (i.e., light posts) do not occur on the adjacent roadways to the Project property, including Avenue 62. The closest signalized traffic intersection is located approximately 2.20 miles north of the Project property, at the Madison Street and Airport Boulevard intersection. It should be noted, and as discussed above, the US BOR Dike No. 4 is a substantial visual barrier that blocks off views from these areas of existing development. The proposed entries and improvements to the Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 frontages will incorporate a uniform landscape and lighting plan outside of the perimeter walls that conforms to standards for City designated image corridors. Light fixtures will accentuate the proposed signage, trees, and other landscaping features. Lights oriented upward and the spillover of light is prohibited at the Project property in compliance with Chapter 9.100.150 of the LQMC. The proposed landscape and lighting plan will also be integrated throughout the Project property in the proposed resort areas, commercial uses, residential communities, and open space areas. For purposes of nighttime safety, the proposed parking lots, gated entry points, common areas, event spaces, courtyards, and pedestrian paths are also expected to include the appropriate levels of illumination. Building lighting will consist of downward -oriented fixtures in strategic locations and will avoid fixtures at unnecessary locations as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code and the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) Land Use Adjacency Guidelines. The City Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Section 9.100.150) provides regulations for reducing light and glare caused by new development. In accordance with Section 9.100.150 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, all exterior lighting shall include adequate energy efficient lighting for public safety while minimizing effects of lighting, such as lighting which (1) has a detrimental effect on astronomical observations, (2) inefficiently utilizes scarce electrical energy, (3) creates a public nuisance or safety hazard. Parking lot lighting shall comply with standards stated in Section 9.100.150 and Section 9.150.080, which requires that graduated light standard heights in parking areas with lower heights in peripheral areas may be required by the Planning Commission to provide compatibility with adjoining properties and streets. Additionally, as recommended in 9.100.150, warm white and natural lamps are preferred to minimize detrimental lighting effects. The CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines are applicable to projects adjacent to or within a Conservation Area, in which lighting shall be shielded and directed toward the developed area. Landscape shielding or other appropriate methods shall be incorporated in Project designs to minimize the effects of lighting adjacent to or within the adjacent Conservation Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-54 October 2023 212 4.1 AESTHETICS Area. This is required by Mitigation Measures B10-2 and B10-30 which requires that lighting be down - shielded to prevent light spillage and directed away from open space and Conservation Areas. See Section 4.4, Biological Resources, and Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, of this Draft EIR for in- depth analysis of the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines. The Project property's compliance with the City's outdoor lighting standards and implementation of Mitigation Measures B10-2 and BIO-30 will also ensure that the Project is compliant with Riverside Couty outdoor lighting Ordinance No. 655 which restricts the permitted use of certain lighting fixtures emitting into the night sky that would result in light pollution. Ordinance No. 655 prohibits the use of light fixtures above 4050 lumens in parking lots, walkways, for security purposes, and for decorative purposes, and restricts the use of light fixtures during certain hours. Additionally, lighting and photometric plans shall be approved by the City as part of the Project's review process. In addition to complying with these standards, the proposed landscaping treatment will act as a visual screen to further attenuate the visibility of light fixtures from the existing back yards of homes and other surrounding vantage points that may be sensitive during the evening hours. Pertaining to glare, the Project property would not introduce facilities or buildings with large reflective surfaces that would generate substantial glare, nor would the Project property involve new sources of high -intensity lighting that would be deemed incompatible with the surrounding residential and open space areas. Materials used will respond to the desert environment and will include stucco, rock fagade, and tile. Unsuitable materials, such as unprotected exposed metal, equipment and venting, unprotected wood, and vinyl, will be prohibited. The proposed architectural color palette will be desert compatible, using earth tones ranging from beiges, gray -green tones, mauves, whites, creams, tan, sand, light brown, and similar earth tones, thereby, avoiding unnatural and bright building facades and preventing daytime glare. This will be completed with a variety of accents, roof tones and textures, with complementary window moldings and architectural detailing. The proposed structures are expected to have natural and light finishes (including white) combined with earth -tones that do not have highly reflective properties or other conditions that would cause substantial daytime or nighttime glare. Onsite ponds associated with the golf training facility and the resort are not anticipated to cover a large enough area to generate substantial glare. Ponds, likely for retention, are typical of communities, especially golf course communities in the City of La Quinta and the surrounding area. Therefore, the impact is less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field The proposed off -site utility field improvements are proposed in a rural area of La Quinta. Development and operation of the proposed well sites and substation would introduce lighting for typical operational practices. Utility infrastructure such as well sites and substations typically include lighting for security purposes and to deter vandalism. It provides safety for line crews who may be performing maintenance at night. Substation light fixtures at newer facilities are typically downward - Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-55 October 2023 213 4.1 AESTHETICS oriented to mitigate light spillage onto adjacent properties and to reduce light pollution. Additionally, a means of switching off a portion of the lights at night to provide reduced lighting may make the site more acceptable to the surrounding community. Well sites may include a light fixture for nighttime maintenance services, however, due to the typically small size of a well site (at least 150 feet by 150 feet), bright industrial lighting for this area is not typically utilized. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant. The proposed substation would contain permanent night lighting. Lighting at the substation would consist of downward -oriented fixtures in areas where nighttime operations or maintenance activities would occur. Lights for maintenance would be turned off during times when lights are not needed. The proposed substation would introduce lighting in an area that is surrounded by vacant and rural agriculture lands, as well as residential communities. Lights at substation facilities typically include fixtures that do not cause spillover onto adjacent properties, while providing security for the substation. The use of downward -oriented fixtures reduces light spillover onto adjacent properties, reducing potential lighting impacts from the facilities. The proposed substation would also introduce new sources of glare to the area. Some components of the Project have reflective surfaces. Elements of the new substation including towers, metal fences, light-colored concrete or masonry retaining walls, light poles, and other elements that are light in color or have shiny, reflective surfaces could produce substantial glare that would adversely affect daytime views in the area. This impact is reduced by Mitigation Measures AES-1 which requires that finishes on all new substation structures with metal surfaces be non -reflective, and include a dulling finish to help blend the structures with the surroundings and reduce glare and color contrast, subject to approval of IID. Therefore, impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. 4.1.5 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts are those resulting from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, combined with the potential visual impacts of this Project. Visual resources in La Quinta at buildout of the General Plan were considered to determine the extent to which the Project would impact the resources, consistent the CEQA Guideline 15130(b)(1)(B) approach of using a summary of planned growth projections in an adopted plan. General Plan and zoning policies and standards relating to aesthetic resources and lighting were also analyzed. The Project property's current land use designations include Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space Recreational. The Project property is currently characterized by the abandoned vineyard that occupies approximately 220 acres of the northern portion of the property, and vacant, undisturbed desert land. The undisturbed areas of the Project property are defined by the native desert vegetation. The Project proposes residential and resort uses that are typical in the City of La Quinta. The existing context of Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-56 October 2023 214 4.1 AESTHETICS the area includes residential communities, manmade infrastructure (i.e., Dike No. 4, percolation ponds), large expanses of agriculture and natural open space. The Project property, which is currently undeveloped and vacant, provides largely unobstructed views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains from public rights -of -ways. Based on the above analysis, Project impacts on aesthetic resources from the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts to existing views of Coral Mountain or the Santa Rosa Mountains. Although it has been determined that the proposed Project would not obstruct the views of the surrounding scenic vistas, other projects planned and permitted by the General Plan, may result in obstructed views of the foothills of the Santa Rosa range, but generally, due to the height limitations included in the Municipal Code and the policies and programs of the General Plan, will preserve the views of the mid -range slopes and peaks of the Santa Rosa Mountains. As a City-wide visual resource, the cumulative impacts associated with obstructed views of the Santa Rosas are expected to remain less than significant with buildout of the General Plan, as the overall view of the range will remain visible throughout the City. Development of vacant areas throughout the City of La Quinta will diminish the number of areas that provide largely unobstructed views of the scenic vistas viewed along public rights -of -ways. Future development in the City would be required to abide by the standards of the Municipal Code or future specific plans. Review of these projects for consistency with goals, policies and programs established in the General Plan will occur as projects are proposed. Buildout of the General Plan is expected to have less than significant impacts on visual character due to the impositions of these regulations. Cumulative impacts associated with light and glare will result from further development of vacant land as the City continues to build out. The same standards requiring limited lighting, directional and screened lighting, and the prohibitions associated with high -intensity lighting included in the Municipal Code in Section 9.100.150, will be applied to future projects, as they are proposed. The proposed Project shall also comply with Section 9.100.150 of the LQMC (page 2-17 of the Travertine SPA). Additionally, lighting and photometric plans shall be approved by the City. The implementation of these standards and requirements is designed specifically to minimize the impacts of light and glare on adjacent properties and throughout the City. Therefore, although lighting levels will increase as development occurs in the City, the cumulative impacts of light and glare are expected to be less than significant at General Plan build out. 4.1.6 Mitigation Measures AES-1 In order to reduce the proposed substation's impact on the existing visual character and reduce the potential degradation of scenic quality of the surrounding area, the Project applicant shall use one or more of the following or comparable techniques: perimeter barriers, landscaping appropriate for the substation facility. Additionally, glare shall be controlled through the use of non -reflective surfaces, dulling finishes to help blend the structures with Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-57 October 2023 215 4.1 AESTHETICS the surroundings and reduce glare and color contrast, or comparable methods subject to the approval of IID. In addition to Mitigation Measure AES-1, the Project shall implement Mitigation Measures 11310-2 and BIO-30 which set standards regarding light fixtures used at the Project property. Please see Section 4.4, Biological Resources. 4.1.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation With the implementation of the Project design features, Mitigation Measures AES-1, as well as Mitigation Measures 11310-2 and BIO-30 presented in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, Project - related impacts to aesthetic resources would be reduced to less than significant levels. 4.1.8 References 1. Development Design Manual, Coachella Valley Water District, May 2022, http://www.cvwd.org/DocumentCenter/View/4206/Development-Design-Manual-PDF?bidld= 2. Integrated Resource Plan, Imperial Irrigation District, November 2018, https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/636927586520070000 3. State Scenic Highways, Caltrans, website accessed on April 8, 2021, https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap- liv-i-scenic-highways 4. Streets and Highways Code — SHC; Division 1. State Highways, Chapter 2. The State Highway System, Article 2.5 State Scenic Highways, California Legislative Information, accessed May 2021, https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displayText.xhtml?lawCode=SHC&division=1.&titl e=&part=&chapter=2.&article=2.5. Travertine Draft EIR 4.1-58 October 2023 216 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.2 Agricultural Resources and Forestry Resources 4.2 Agricultural Resources and Forestry Resources 4.2.1 Introduction This section establishes the environmental setting for purposes of agricultural and forestry resources, identifies both the applicable thresholds of significance and the Project's potentially significant impacts to agricultural and forestry resources, and identifies mitigation measures capable of reducing any potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) prepared by the Altum Group (Appendix B.1), the Updated LESA Report prepared by TRG Land (Appendix B.2), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soils Report, the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) developed by the California Department of Conservation (CDC) (2010), the Land Cover Mapping and Monitoring Program (LCMMP) conducted by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection between 1992 and 2002, the Williamson Act Program (2007). Sources used in the preparation of this section are identified in subsection 4.2.8, References, at the end of this Agricultural Resources section, and Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. 4.2.2 Existing Conditions The Project property occupies approximately 855 acres in the southern -most portion of La Quinta. The Project property is generally bounded by undeveloped land and the Coral Mountain formation to the north; the extension of Avenue 62 and the CVWD Dike No. 4 with related stormwater impoundments located to the east; Martinez Mountain to the south; and open space and the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west. Portions of the Project property abut the Martinez Rockslide and occur on braided alluvial fans emanating from the nearby foothills. The local lands to the east are characterized as well -established agricultural areas that have been undergoing conversion to urban uses over the past several decades, including residential and golf course communities. Lands west of the existing Dike No. 4 are almost entirely undeveloped open space. The Project's northern portion has been disturbed by its previous operation as a cultivated vineyard. The cultivated vineyard is currently abandoned and has not been in operation since 2007, however, inoperable irrigation equipment and trellises remain onsite. The abandoned cultivated vineyard is identified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC) as being located within an area designated as Unique Farmland, as indicated in Exhibit 4.2-1, Project Farmland Importance. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-1 October 2023 217 �Projecir i9oundary ForrniJand Typo Prime Farmland Unique Famplarpd Local Imporfaa-ce Land Other "rids Urban-Builf Up Land Watee bodies Not Mapped C.¢}?; l3 Nalix-al Geoq,rayn�c.Sc�c ty. I-u4a.+S. Sands. �vl W)AA �taJrcesL EVI C3�rTMrr llS�:S `RF MSA-CONSULTINIC INC PROJECT FARMLAND IMPORTANCE TRAVE �.N E Source: LESA Report Update, TRG Land, Inc. EXHIBI "Z-1 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 4.2,E Regulatory Setting State Programs California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act) The California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (the Williamson Act, Government Code Sections 51200 through 51297.4) encourages the preservation of agricultural lands through tax incentives due to the increasing trend toward the conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses. The act enables counties and cities to designate agricultural preserves (Williamson Act lands) and within these preserves, offer preferential taxation to agricultural landowners based on the agricultural income producing value of the property. This approach ties real estate tax rates to the agricultural value of the land rather that the market rate, which can escalate rapidly as areas around a farm or dairy convert to urban uses. In return for the preferential tax rate, the landowner is required to sign a contract with the county or city agreeing not to develop the land with non-agricultural uses for a minimum of ten years. On the ten-year anniversary date of the contract, it is renewed automatically, unless a notice of non -renewal or petition for cancellation is filed. State Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program The California Department of Conservation (DOC) established the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) in 1982. The FMMP is a non -regulatory program and provides a consistent and impartial analysis of agricultural land use and land use changes throughout California. The FMMP produces maps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts on California's agricultural resources. Prime agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status and identified by the following categories, collectively referred to as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Farmland of Local Importance, Urban and Built -Up Land, and Other Land. Descriptions of the categories and their applicability to the Project area are discussed as followed: Prime Farmland Prime farmland is considered as land that has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Prime Farmland occurs approximately 0.025 miles west of the Project property. Farmland of Statewide Importance Farmland of Statewide Importance is similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agriculture at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-3 October 2023 219 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES In the area of the proposed Project, Farmland of Statewide Importance occurs approximately 2 miles east of the Project property boundary. Unique Farmland Unique Farmland consists of lesser quality requirements for soils used for the production of the State's leading agricultural crops. Unique Farmland is usually irrigated but can include non -irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. In order to be designated as Unique Farmland, the Land would have to have been planted at some time during the past four years prior to the mapping date. Approximately 26 percent of the Project's total area was designated Unique Farmland in the 2016 FMMP Important Farmland Map. Although cultivation of the vineyard ceased around 2007, approximately 9 years prior to the 2016 FMMP update, the evaluation was still undertaken due the Project property's proximity to properties in agricultural production. Farmland of Local Importance Farmland of Local Importance includes soils that are listed as prime or statewide importance but lack available irrigation water. Land planted to dryland crops, such as barley, oats, and wheat. Lands producing major crops for Riverside County but that are not listed as unique crops. Farmland of Local Importance occurs approximately 0.25 miles north of the Project property. However, the north -lying property is vacant and not zoned for agricultural uses by the City of La Quinta. Grazing Land Grazing Land is land on which existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. Grazing Land does not occur in the Coachella Valley, and therefore, does not occur in proximity to the Project property. Urban and Built -Up Land Urban and Built -Up Land is occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf course, sewage treatment, and water control structures. Urban and Built -Up Land occurs north and northeast of the Project property, in the developed neighborhoods of La Quinta. Other Land Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-4 October 2023 220 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Other Land is defined as land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments, brush, timber, wetland and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing, confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities, strip mines, borrow pits, and water bodies smaller than forty acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than forty acres is mapped and identified as "Other Land." In the area of the proposed Project, Other Land occurs in the northern portion of the Project property. Other Land also occurs north, northeast, and west of the Project property. Regional and Local Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office The Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office promotes and protects the agricultural industry of the County and its environment. The Commission ensures the health and safety of the County's citizens and fosters confidence and equity in the marketplace through education and the fair and uniform enforcement of laws, regulations, and ordinances enacted by the people of the State of California and the County of Riverside. The first County agricultural commissioner was appointed in 1909, after the establishment of the Riverside County Board of Horticulture in 1893. Riverside County General Plan According to the Riverside County General Plan, one of Riverside County's most important land uses in terms of historic character and economic strength is widespread and diverse agriculture lands. Agriculture production is one of the largest industries in terms of dollar value in the County and competes successfully in the global economy. The County's Agriculture (AG) land use designation was established to help conserve productive agricultural lands within the county. These include row crops, nurseries, citrus groves and vineyards, dairies, ranches, poultry and hog farms, and other agricultural related uses. AG land uses are mapped in the unincorporated areas of Riverside County, and do not occur in the City of La Quinta. La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report The early abundance of Agricultural Resources within the City of La Quinta have been greatly reduced, according to the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR). However, agriculture is still an economic factor east of the incorporated boundary, within the proposed Sphere of Influence. Per the LQGP EIR, implementation of the LQGP will facilitate urban development on lands designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmlands of Local Importance. At the time the LQGP EIR was written, there were approximately 1,700 acres of important agricultural land located within the City. However, this area is not in agricultural production and has been designated for urban uses under the General Plan for some time. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-5 October 2023 221 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 4.2.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance According to the CEQA Guidelines' Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated. Would the Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? Methodology Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model Due to the Project property's designation as Unique Farmland, and the Project property's proximity to nearby properties in agricultural production, an agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) was prepared for the proposed Project by the Altum Group in 2018 (Appendix B.1) and updated by TRG Land in 2021 (Appendix B.2). The LESA Model was developed to provide lead agencies with a methodology to ensure that potentially significant effects on the environment caused by agricultural land conversions are quantitatively and consistently considered in the environmental review process. The LESA Model describes an approach for rating the relative quality of land resources using specific measurable features. The LESA system is a point -based method composed of six different factors: Land Capability Classification, Storie Index, Project Size, Water Resource Availability, Surrounding Agricultural Land, and Surrounding Protected Resource Land. The factors are categorized into two categories: Land Evaluation Factors and Site Assessment Factors. For a given project, each of these factors is separately rated on a 100-point scale. The factors are then weighted relative to one another and combined, resulting in a single numeric score for a given project. The maximum attainable score is 100 points. This project score becomes the basis for making a determination of a project's potential significance, based upon a range of established scoring thresholds (Department of Conservation, 1997). Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-6 October 2023 222 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Land Evaluation Factors The Land Evaluation factors are based on measures of soil resource quality and include Land Use Capability Classification and Storie Index. The Land Capability Classification (LCC) Rating: The LCC indicates the suitability of soils for most kinds of crops. Soils are rated on a scale from Class I to Class VIII. Soils having the fewest limitations receive the highest rating. The Storie Index Rating: The Storie Index provides a numeric rating (based on a 100-point scale) of the relative degree of suitability or value of a given soil for intensive agriculture use. This rating is based on soil characteristics only. The Project property soils identified within the USDA survey comprise 34.4± percent of the Project property. The reason why the Project soils survey does not completely encompass the Project property is due to the absence of available soil data according to the USDA survey. However, the portion of the Project property that is absent of soil survey data covers the entire southern half of the Project property, which is outside of the area within the Project designated as Unique Farmland by the California Department of Conservation. See Exhibit 4.2-1. Site Assessment Factors The LESA Model includes four Site Assessment Factors that are separately rated. They include: Project Size Rating, Water Resources Availability Rating, Surrounding Agricultural Land Rating, and Surrounding Protected Resource Land Rating. Protect Size Factors The Project Size Rating recognizes the role of farm size in determining the viability of commercial agricultural operations. Larger farming operations generally can provide greater flexibility in farm management and marketing decisions. In addition, larger operations tend to have greater impacts upon the local economy through direct employment, as well as impacts upon supporting industries and food processing industries. Water Resources Availability Rating The Water Resources Availability Rating is based on various water sources that may supply a given property, and then determine whether different restrictions in supply are likely to take place in years that are characterized as drought and non -drought conditions. Surrounding Agricultural Land Rating The Surrounding Agricultural Land Rating is designed to provide a measurement of the level of agricultural land use for lands within the Zone of Influence (ZOI) of the Project property. The "Zone Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-7 October 2023 223 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES of Influence" is the amount of surrounding lands up to a minimum of one -quarter mile from the Project property boundary. Parcels that are intersected by the quarter -mile buffer are included in their entirety. The LESA Model rates the potential significance of the conversion of an agricultural parcel having a higher proportion of surrounding land in agricultural production (higher rating) as opposed to an agricultural parcel having a smaller proportion of surrounding land in agricultural production (lower rating) (California Department of Conservation, 1997). Surrounding Protected Resource Land Rati The Surrounding Protected Resource Land Rating is essentially an extension of the Surrounding Agricultural Land Rating and is scored in a similar manner. Protected resource lands are those lands with long-term use restrictions that are compatible with or supportive of agricultural uses of land. Included among this rating classification are the following: • Williamson Act contracted land; • Publicly owned lands maintained as park, forest, or watershed resources; and, • Lands with agricultural, wildlife habitat, open space, or other natural resource easements that restrict the conversion of such land to urban or industrial uses. LESA Significance Threshold As previously stated, the rating factors is separately rated on a 100-point scale. A determination of a Project's potential significance on agricultural lands is based upon a range of established scoring thresholds shown in Table 4.2-1, California LESA Model Scoring Thresholds. Table 4.2-1 California LESA Model Scoring Thresholds Total LESA Score Scoring Decision 0 to 39 Points Not considered significant Considered significant only if Land Evaluation and Site Assessment sub - 40 to 59 Points scores are greater than or equal to 20 points Considered significant unless either Land Evaluation or Site Assessment 60 to 79 sub -score is less than 20 points 80 to 100 Considered significant Source: Table 9 of California Department of Conservation, California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model. Project Impacts a&e Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland); or Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-8 October 2023 224 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES As shown in Exhibit 4.2-1, Project Farmland Importance, nearly a quarter of the approximately 855- acre Project property is within an area designated as Unique Farmland. This area is characterized by the remnants of a cultivated vineyard, which has been abandoned since 2007. Development of the Project property would convert Unique Farmland into non-agricultural uses. To assess the level of impact, the Project property was analyzed under the California Agricultural LESA (Appendix B.1 and B.2). The findings are discussed below. Land Evaluation Factors The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil survey (Appendix B.2) identified five soil types on the Project property. These included Carrizo stony sand (CcC), Carsitas gravelly sand (CdC), Rock Outcrop (RO), Rubble Land (RU), and Myoma fine sand (MaB). Exhibit 4.2-2, Project Soils Type, indicates the locations of the soils that are found on the Project property. The Land Capability Class (LCC) and Storie Index Rating for the onsite soils is provided in Table 4.2-2, Soil Suitability — Map Symbol Mapping Unit Capability, below. The LESA Model assigns ratings to each LCC and multiplies that number by the proportion of the Project property that contains each soil class to find the LCC score. A Storie Index score is calculated by multiplying the proportion of the Project in each soil type by the soil type's Storie Index rating. Table 4.2-2 Soil Suitability — Map Symbol Mapping Unit Capability Soil Map Unit Soil Mapping Unit Name Land Capability Class Storie Index Rating Ccc Carrizo stony sand VII 44 CdC Carsitas gravelly sand VII 39 MaB Myoma fine sand VII 52 RO Rock Outcrop VIII N/A RU Rubble land VIII N/A Source: United States Department of Agriculture, 1981. Notes: 1. Class VII (7) — Soils that have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use mainly to rangeland, forestland, or wildlife habitat. 2. Class Vlll (8) — Soils and miscellaneous areas have limitations that preclude commercial plant production and that restrict their use to recreational purposes, wildlife habitat, watershed, or esthetic purposes. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-9 October 2023 225 M .max•. r L ra�iry T s Ro C d C iRU I i r I ■ { � R Rsr; .RU rf' hiarkez 13+xSL �!id,` �13ENp r rrmo- iar+w rl+v, . _ s ooFg1 sWMI� L, �J E�1Gtls r�,a��•fana U•475 81a� I I�� iltinuu tlnat a�rd. t-3Xi Slopa Source: LESA Report Update, TRG Land, Inc. M1.191' VII j',1 4 W1 fc .•-.-1 'krC 1m7 j91. 11So.Mf'}S II PROJECT SOILS TYPE TRAVEJ EXHIBI 2-2 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES The Land Evaluation (LE) scores, as determined by the LESA Model is indicated in Table 4.2-3, Land Capability Classification and Storie Index Score. Per the table below, the onsite soils have a LCC Score of 7.56, and a Storie Index Score of 30.32. Table 4.2-3 Land Capability Classification (LCC) and Storie Index Score A B C D E F G H Map Symbol - Soil Acres Portion of the Project Area LCC LCC Rating LCC Score Storie Index Storie Index Score CcC 134.4 15.72% VII 10 1.57 44 6.92 CdC 509 59.53% VII 10 5.95 39 23.22 MaB 3.1 0.36% VII 10 0.04 52 0.19 RO 12.2 1.43% VIII 0 0 N/A N/A RU 196.3 22.96% VIII 0 0 N/A N/A NOTCOM1 0 0.0% N/A - - - Subtotal for Soil Survey Area 855 100.0% Total 855 100.0% -- -- 7.56 -- 30.32 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA), Table 2, June 2021. Notes: See Table 1 Notes for a description of the soil's LCC rating. 1. NOTCOM indicates all land within the project site for which USDA soil data was not available. Site Assessment Factors Project Size In regard to agricultural productivity, the size of the farming operation can be considered not just from its total acreage, but from the acreage of different quality lands that comprise the operation. Lands with higher quality soils lend themselves to greater management and crop flexibility and have the potential to provide greater economic return per acre. For a given project, instead of relying on a single acreage figure in the Project Size rating, the project is divided into three acreage groupings based upon the LCC ratings that were previously determined in the LE analysis (Table 4.2-3). Under the Project Size rating, relatively fewer acres of high -quality soils are required to achieve a maximum Project Size score. Alternatively, an abundance in acres of lesser quality soils could also achieve a high to maximum score. Table 4.2-4, Project Size Score, summarizes the Project Size score for the proposed Project. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-11 October 2023 227 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Table 4.2-4 Project Size Score Map Symbol - Soil Acres LCC LCC Class I or II LCC Class II LCC Class IV-VIII CcC 134.4 VII -- -- 134.4 CdC 509.0 VII -- -- 509.0 MaB 3.1 VII -- -- 3.1 RO 12.2 VIII -- -- 12.2 RU 196.3 VIII 196.3 Total 855.0 -- -- -- 855.0 Project Size Scores 0 0 80 Highest Score 80 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA), Table 3, June 2021. Notes: See Table 1 Notes for a description of the soil's LCC rating. Water Resources Availability The Project property relies on groundwater resources as the source of water supply. The majority of the Project property (74 percent) is underlain on non -irrigated land that consists of alluvial sediments and rock outcrops and rubble. The remaining portion of the Project property (26.7 percent) consists of an abandoned cultivated vineyard with an existing inoperable irrigation system that last operated in 2007 and located on the northern half of the Project property. The irrigation system for the vineyard consisted of three onsite groundwater wells that provided irrigation for the vineyard. The three wells are currently out of commission and would require new equipment (i.e., pump generator, fertilizer tank, pole -mounted transformers, etc.) to be installed to become operable again. The proposed Project's outdoor landscaping and indoor water use demand will obtain its domestic (potable) water supply from groundwater wells drawing from the Whitewater River Subbasin in the Coachella Valley. Currently, five groundwater wells are needed to adequately supply the Project as determined by CVWD, upon the approval of the Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV), included in the EIR as Appendix N.1. The Water Resources Availability score is summarized in Table 4.2-5, Water Resource Availability. The Project received a Water Resource Availability Rating of 24.0 due in part to only a quarter of the Project property containing potentially irrigable lands, which in its current state of abandonment, would otherwise require new equipment to repair and reactivate onsite irrigation for the vineyard. The irrigation equipment requirement poses an economic restriction that may affect or alter water supply availability, either during drought or during non -drought years, and as a result, affects (lowers) the Project's water resource score. Additionally, the remainder of the Project property is non -irrigated and is not suitable for dryland agriculture. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-12 October 2023 228 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Table 4.2-5 Water Resource Availability A B C D E Project Portion Water Source Proportion of Project area Water Availability Score Weighted Availability Score 1 Groundwater 26.7% 90 24.0 2 Not Irrigated 73.3% 0 0 Total Water Resource Score 24.0 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA), Table 4, June 2021. Surrounding Agricultural Land and Protected Resource Land Rating The Project's "Zone of Influence" (ZOI), which includes the Project property and the area within a quarter -mile radius of the Project, is illustrated in Exhibit 4.2-3, Surrounding Agricultural and Protected Lands. The ZOI determines the distribution of land used for agricultural and protected land uses. Parcels that are intersected by the quarter -mile buffer are included in their entirety. The LESA Model rates the potential significance of the conversion of an agricultural parcel in having a larger proportion of surrounding land in agricultural production (higher rating) as opposed to an agricultural parcel in having a smaller proportion of surrounding land in agricultural production (lower rating). Since agricultural land only occurs northeast of the Project property and occupies less than 40 percent of the buffer area, the Project property is therefore assigned a Surrounding Agricultural Land Score of zero. The Project property is surrounded and encroaches upon the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, to the northwest, west, south, and southeast. The Conservation Area overlaps with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Critical Habitat designation. Therefore, because surrounding Protected Resource Lands were found within 73 percent of the Project property buffer, the proposed Project is assigned a Surrounding Protected Resource Land score of 70. The Surrounding Agricultural Land and Protected Resource Land score for the proposed Project is provided in Table 4.2-6, Surrounding Agricultural and Protected Lands. Table 4.2-6 Surrounding Agricultural and Protected Lands Acres of Percent Surrounding Total Acres Acres in Surrounding Protected Percentin Protected Protected within "Zone Agricultural Agricultural Resource Agriculture Resources Resource of Influence" Production Land Score Land Land Land Score 4,109.92 277 3,004.6 6.7% 73% 0 70 Source: The Altum Group, Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA), Table 5, December 2017. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-13 October 2023 229 I Pfgiect Boundary quarter mile Buffer Cn Ms e*V,700r} Area 80erndarry Farmland Type Prime Farmland unigva Farmland Locaf;mportance Land pXher i,and5 Urban-BuRt Up Land aferbadies Not Mapped Source: LESA Report Update, TRG Land, Inc. LRE-1 r r::-:riot:b 2013 Nauanal C+eog}a 1P Sac,. ty. ;-Oa bed. Sodomev am S. -IQAA A-CONSULTINGINC SURROUNDING AGRICULTURAL & PROTECTED LANDS _ �aJr: M1J} ivl. ?!Jr:•���;FI:J�Q°4tiey��.192' TRAVERTINE EXHIB1FT.2-3 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES LESA Summary The LESA Model is weighted so that half of the total LESA score of a given project is derived from the Land Evaluation and half from the Site Assessment. As shown in Table 4.2-7, Final LESA Score Sheet Summary, the Land Evaluation sub -score is 9.47, while the Site Assessment sub -score is 19.01. The final LESA score is 28.48. Table 4.2-7 Final LESA Score Sheet Summary Factor Rating (0-100 Points) Factor Weighting (Total = 1.00) Weighted Factor Rating Land Evaluation (LE) 1. Land Capability Classification (LCC Rating) 7.6 0.25 1.89 2. Storie Index Rating 30.32 0.25 7.58 Land Evaluation Sub -score 9.47 Site Assessment (SA) 1. Project Size Rating 80.0 0.15 12.0 2. Water Resource Availability Rating 24.0 0.15 3.60 3. Surrounding Agricultural Land Rating 0.0 0.15 0.0 4. Surrounding Protected Resource Lands Rating 70.0 0.05 3.50 Site Assessment Sub -score 19.10 Total 28.57 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA), Table 6, June 2021. According to the California LESA Model Scoring Threshold (Table 4.2-1), a final LESA score between 0 to 39 points is not considered significant. Therefore, with the final LESA score of 28.48, the Project is not considered to have a significant impact on lands designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Impacts would be less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field The project proposes the development of five off -site well sites and a substation. The proposed off - site improvements will occur on approximately 2.5 acres within a 2-mile radius of the Project's northern and northeastern boundaries. According to the California FMMP, a majority of the land within a 2-mile radius is considered Urban and Built -Up Land (approximately 34 percent). Other Land occupies approximately 28.7 percent of the potential off -site utility field area. Farmland of Local Importance and Prime Farmland comprise of approximately 18.6 percent and 16.2 percent of the off - site area, respectively. The table below and Exhibit 4.2-4 indicates the California FMMP categories generally 2-miles north and northeast of the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-15 October 2023 231 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Table 4.2-8 Off -Site FMMP Categories Category Percentage Prime Farmland 16.2% Farmland of Statewide Importance 0.1% Unique Farmland 2.5% Farmland of Local Importance 18.6% Urban and Built -Up Land 33.9 % Other Land 28.7% Total Off -Site Area 100% The off -site utility field could potentially occur on Prime Farmland or land previously used as agricultural land, as indicated by in the FMMP map and in Table 4.2-8. According to the Riverside County 2014-2016 Land Use Conversion, provided by the California Department of Conservation, approximately 118,077 acres of Prime Farmland was recorded in 2014. In 2016, approximately 117,484 acres of Prime Farmland was inventoried in Riverside County. Between 2014 and 2016, approximately 593 acres (or approximately 0.5 percent) of Prime Farmland in Riverside County was converted to different uses. The development of the wells and substation will be constructed in compliance with CVWD and IID standards regarding their facilities. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract As shown in Exhibit 4.2-4, Williamson Act Contracted Lands, the Project property is not located within or near lands designated under the Williamson Act for prime farmland resources. Moreover, the Project property is currently zoned Low Density Residential (RL), Medium High Density Residential (RMH), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Tourist Commercial (CT), Golf Course (GC), and Open Space (OS). Zoning for agricultural use does not occur within the Project boundaries. Therefore, there would be no impacts as a result of development of the Project. Off -Site Utility Field As previously stated, the exact locations of the off -site utility field facilities has not been determined; however, based upon consultations with the local water and power providers (CVWD and IID) they are proposed to be located east of the Project site and Dike No. 4, within a 2-mile radius, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west (see Exhibit 3-3 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description). The proposed location of the off -site utility field must meet utility provider requirements and be available for purchase in order to develop the facilities. The potential off -site utility field locations may occur within the City's jurisdictional boundaries, or within the incorporated areas of Riverside County. Per the City of La Quinta's Zoning Map, the off -site locations are located within the zoning designations Low Density Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-17 October 2023 233 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Residential (RL), Medium Density Residential (RM), and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) which allow for public utility facilities. Land use impacts associated with these future facilities are expected to be less than significant. Most of the potential off -site utility field area is situated outside of La Quinta's jurisdictional boundary. Off -site parcels are located within Riverside County's light agricultural zone (A-1). A-1 zones allow public utility facilities with a plot plan approval. The plot plan approval may include conditions requiring fencing and landscaping of the parcel to assure that the use is compatible with the surrounding area. Additionally, the off -site utility field is not located in Williamson Act Contracted Lands. Impacts are less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-18 October 2023 234 IM Project Boundary L--j ActiveAG Preserve Wiffiamsor) Act Lo -AMInO wlrce ON% No n ArLmq IvLL.] C!. ri L-131 lqso- SoLwc,- s, Esri. HERE, G arfr.in. I nteriTmp, mr-cornan t P Cl�r t; SG S FAO. NPS.. N' RCA N. G ecEwe, PON. Ka diaslei IN L, CMGlance &I rwe y. Erwi -J bpran. M ETI Essi China (Hone} Kan g). (c) Oper!Streetm ap cc—fbwvs- and the G!S User Commur?q L Source: LESA Report Update, TRG Land, Inc. MSA-CONSULTING INC WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACTED LANDS TRAVERTINE EXHIBH2-5 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES c&d. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production or result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use The City of La Quinta does not have any existing zoning ordinances that pertain to forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. The City of La Quinta has no existing land designated as forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Additionally, Project implementation would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, there would be no impacts. Off -Site Utility Field The off -site utility field is proposed to be located within a 2-mile radius of the Project boundaries. This area does not include existing land designated as forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production by the City of La Quinta or Riverside County. Therefore, implementation of the proposed off -site utility field would not conflict with existing zoning, or cause rezoning of forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Additionally, operation of the off -site utility field would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, there would be no impacts. 4.2.5 Cumulative Impacts The Project's current land use designations include Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space Recreation. As determined in this analysis of Project impacts to agricultural resources, the Project would not result in impacts to agricultural or forestry resources. Although a portion of the Project property previously operated as a vineyard, the operation has been abandoned since 2007. The property has been zoned for residential, recreational, and commercial uses since 1995. Most farms or agricultural practices do not currently exist within the La Quinta City boundaries. Per the LQGP EIR, agriculture is still an economic factor east of the incorporated boundary within the proposed sphere of influence and beyond. Agricultural land uses are not established in the City's land use and zoning maps. Cumulative impacts are those resulting from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, combined with the potential visual impacts of this Project. Agricultural resources in La Quinta at buildout of the General Plan were considered to determine the extent to which the Project would impact the resources. General Plan zoning polices and standards relating to land uses were also analyzed. Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-20 October 2023 236 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FORESTRY RESOURCES The General Plan EIR states that future development on vacant land previously used for agriculture will be more suburban in nature. Additionally, the General Plan EIR states that because City agricultural uses make up a small portion of agriculture in Riverside County, the eventual loss of these lands will not significantly impact agriculture in the region (page III-10). Therefore, there are no cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Project related to agricultural land uses since the Project does not operate as a vineyard, and it is not zoned for agricultural uses. 4.2.6 Mitigation Measures No Mitigation Measures are required. 4.2.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation Not applicable. 4.2.8 References 1. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soils Report, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), available at https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm 2. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), California Department of Conservation (CDC), available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp 3. Land Cover Mapping and Monitoring Program (LCMMP), California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 1992 through 2002, available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r5/communitvforests/?cid=fsbdev3 046700 4. Williamson Act Program, California Department of Conservation, available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dirp/wa Travertine Draft EIR 4.2-21 October 2023 237 Page intentionally blank 238 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.3 Air Quality 4.3 Air Quality 4.3.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to describe the existing air quality in the Coachella Valley, regional and local characteristics that affect air quality, identify the significance of the potential impacts on air quality and public health resulting from implementation of the proposed Project, and to propose feasible mitigation measures to reduce any potentially significant air quality impacts. The analysis contained in this section is based on the findings of the Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA) and the Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), both dated January 31, 2023. The purpose of the AQIA was to evaluate the potential impacts to air quality associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project and identify feasible mitigation measures to avoid and minimize Project impacts. The AQIA relied on the California Emissions Estimator ModelTM (CaIEEMod) Version 2016.3.2) as the current and prescribed version of this software at the time of release of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). The AQ and GHG Memorandum was prepared in part to ascertain operation emissions using the more current version of CaIEEMod (2022.1) that has been released since the NOP. The AQ and GHG Memorandum provides the most current operational emission estimates and confirms the findings in the initial reports. The air quality analysis also accounts for emissions generated from development of off -site infrastructure, comprising a conservative number for a 2.5-acre substation, five domestic water wells, and street improvements. The criteria pollutant emission quantities associated with the construction of off -site facilities have been calculated and included with the Project -wide emission levels for construction and operation. The AQIA documentation referenced in this section is provided in the Appendices of this Draft EIR (Appendix C.1 and Appendix C.2). 4.3.2 Existing Conditions Regional Air Basin Conditions The Project property and the Coachella Valley are located within the Riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), under jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SSAB is a northwest to southeast region extending from the San Gorgonio Pass to the Mexican border. The regional climate, including temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation, and amount of sunshine significantly influence the air quality in the SSAB. The climate of the Coachella Valley is a continental, desert -type climate, with hot summers, mild winters, and very little annual Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-1 October 2023 239 4.3 AIR QUALITY rainfall. Precipitation on the valley floor averages 3.6 inches per year, which is 65% to 75% less annual precipitation than western portions of Riverside County and the coastal counties in Southern California. A majority of the Whitewater River Region annual rainfall occurs in the winter season and a portion occurs in the summer as convective rainfall events (thunderstorms). The Coachella Valley floor is subject to seasonally high winds, especially during the spring and fall. Prevailing winds are from the northwest through southeast, with secondary flows from the southeast. The strongest and most persistent winds typically occur immediately to the east of Banning Pass, which is noted as a wind power generation resource area. Aside from this locale, the wind conditions in the remainder of the Coachella Valley are geographically distinct. Portions of the SSAB frequently experience surface inversions which can hinder vertical mixing of pollutants and can persist for one or more days, causing air stagnation and the buildup of pollutants. Subsidence inversions are common from November through June and are relatively absent from July through October. The Coachella Valley desert conditions generate large volumes of sand and gravel than are discharged from surrounding mountain canyons and picked up by prevailing strong winds. In addition to sand migration, sorting of sand and silt exposed lighter soils to wind that carries fine particulates aloft and generates occasionally high concentrations of particular matter, which is further discussed below. Local Physical Conditions The proposed Specific Plan Amendment encompasses an area of approximately 855 acres primarily consisting of undeveloped land located on a bajada extending eastward from the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Approximately 220 acres of the site were previously cleared and in cultivation but are currently fallow and stabilized as a result of compaction and root system stability from prior vineyard uses. The Project property is exposed to seasonal winds capable of generating dust. The Project property is separated from the nearest residential development by a distance of approximately 1,268 feet. 4.3.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Clean Air Act The Federal Clean Air Act of 1970 (CAA) was enacted to protects and improve the nation's air quality, and has been amended numerous times since. The CAA establishes federal air quality standards (National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)) for criteria air pollutants: 03 (ozone), CO, NOx, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead, and specifies future dates for achieving compliance. The CAA also mandates the preparation, approval, and enactment of State Implementation Plans (SIPS) for local areas not meeting these standards. SIPS must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the Travertine EIR 4.3-2 October 2023 240 4.3 AIR QUALITY standards will be met. The 1990 amendments to the CAA that identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS require a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and incorporate additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The sections of the CAA most relevant to the proposed development include Title I (Non - Attainment Provisions) and Title II (Mobile Source Provisions). Title I provisions were established with the goal of attaining the NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants: 03, N021 S021 PM10, CO, PM2.5, and Pb. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an additional standard for 03 and to adopt a NAAQS for PM2.5. Mobile source emissions from cars and trucks are regulated in accordance with Title II provisions that require the use of cleaner burning fuels. Automobile manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons and NOx, which is a collective term that includes all forms of nitrogen oxides emitted as byproducts of the combustion process. State California Clean Air Act The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) mandates health -based air quality standards at the State level and delineated responsibilities and authority of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Air Quality Management Districts (AQMDs). CARB is responsible for enforcing State standards, which are achieved through State Implementation Plans (SIP), such as the Coachella Valley PM10 SIP currently in effect. Regional and Local South Coast Air Quality Management District South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the regulatory agency responsible for improving air quality for large areas of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, including the Coachella Valley. Within SCAQMD jurisdiction, about 25% of this area's ozone -forming air pollution comes from stationary sources, both businesses and residences and 75% comes from mobile sources, mainly cars, trucks and buses, but also construction equipment, ships, trains and airplanes. Emission standards for mobile sources are established by the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The SCAQMD regional Air Quality Management Plan serves as the blueprint to bring this area into compliance with federal and state clean air standards. The Project property is located within the Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30. Within SRA 30, the SCAQMD Coachella Valley 2 monitoring station, located 7.36 miles northeast of the Project property, is the nearest long-term air quality monitoring station for 03, PM1o, and PM2.s. As the Coachella Valley 2 monitoring station does not include statistics for CO and NO2, the next nearest station will be used. The Coachella Valley 1 monitoring station, located 23.01 miles northwest of the Project, is the next nearest monitoring station that reports air quality statistics for CO and NO2. It should be noted that Travertine EIR 4.3-3 October 2023 241 4.3 AIR QUALITY both Coachella Valley 1 and Coachella Valley 2 monitoring stations are located within the same SRA. The purpose of the SCAQMD's SRA's is to divide the air basin into geographic areas that have similar air quality considerations. As such, using another monitoring site within the same SRA is appropriate and consistent with SCAQMD recommendations. Further a review of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) monitoring stations was conducted, a review revealed that CARB does not monitor CO concentrations and the nearest monitoring sites for NO2 within the SSAB were the El Centro-9th Street monitoring station, which is located more than 90 miles southeast of the Project property. The Coachella Valley is in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) under SCAQMD's jurisdiction. Thus, it is subject to the provisions of the SCAQMD Rule Book, which sets forth policies and other measures designed to meet federal and state ambient air quality standards. These rules, along with SCAQMD's 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) and draft 2022 AQMP, are intended to satisfy the planning requirements of both the federal and State Clean Air Acts. The SCAQMD also monitors daily pollutant levels and meteorological conditions throughout the District. Air Quality Standards Existing air quality is measured at established SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations. Monitored air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards. The Coachella Valley region has three permanent air quality monitoring stations operated by SCAQMD. Of these existing monitoring stations, the eastern Coachella Valley location in Indio is the most representative of the Project setting in terms of location and criteria pollutants being monitored. Regional air quality is considered to be in attainment by the state if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for 03, CO, S02 (1 and 24 hour), NO2, PM1o, and PM2.5 are not exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. Attainment status for a pollutant means that the SCAQMD meets the standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the California EPA (CalEPA). Conversely, nonattainment means that an area has monitored air quality that does not meet the NAAQS or California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) standards. In order to improve air quality in nonattainment areas, a State Implementation Plan (SIP) is drafted by CARB. The SIP outlines the measures that the state will take to improve air quality. The following air pollutants are collectively known as criteria air pollutants and are defined as pollutants for which established air quality standards have been adopted by federal and state governments: Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon - containing fuels, such as gasoline or wood. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. CO is emitted by automobiles, trucks, heavy construction equipment, farming equipment, and a variety of residential, commercial, and industrial energy users. The SSAB is in attainment for CO. In terms of health effects, individuals Travertine EIR 4.3-4 October 2023 242 4.3 AIR QUALITY with a deficient blood supply to the heart are the most susceptible to the adverse effects of CO exposure. The effects observed include earlier onset of chest pain with exercise, and electrocardiograph changes indicative of decreased oxygen (02) supply to the heart. Sulfur Dioxide (S02) is a colorless, extremely irritating gas or liquid. It enters the atmosphere as a pollutant mainly as a result of burning high sulfur -content fuel oils and coal, and from chemical processes occurring at chemical plants and refineries. When S02 oxidizes in the atmosphere, it forms SO4. Collectively, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX). For sensitive receptors, a few minutes of exposure to low levels of S02 can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics, all of whom are sensitive to its effects. The SSAB is in attainment for S02. In terms of health effects, a few minutes of exposure to low levels of S02 can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics, all of whom are sensitive to its effects. In asthmatics, increase in resistance to air flow, as well as reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe breathing difficulties, are observed after acute exposure to S02. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) include Nitric oxide (NO) and Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), which are the primary oxides of nitrogen. These oxides are produced at high temperatures during combustion as byproducts of motor vehicles, power plants, and off -road equipment. NOx contributes to the formation of ozone. Short-term exposure of NO2 can result in airway constriction and diminished lung capacity and is highly toxic when inhaled. Populations living near roadways are more likely to experience the effects of nitrogen oxides due to elevated exposure to motor vehicle exhaust. In terms of health effects, population -based studies suggest that an increase in acute respiratory illness, including infections and respiratory symptoms in children (not infants), is associated with long-term exposure to NO2 at levels found in homes with gas stoves, which are higher than ambient levels found in Southern California. Increase in resistance to air flow and airway contraction is observed after short-term exposure to NO2 in healthy subjects. Larger decreases in lung functions are observed in individuals with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (e.g., chronic bronchitis, emphysema) than in healthy individuals, indicating a greater susceptibility of these sub -groups. Ozone (03) is a highly reactive and unstable gas that is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and NOx, both primarily byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. 03 concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, and warm temperature conditions are favorable to the formation of this pollutant. The SSAB is in non -attainment for the federal 8-hour 03 standard. In terms of health effects, individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with preexisting lung disease, such as asthma and chronic pulmonary lung disease, are considered to be the most susceptible sub -groups for 03 effects. Short-term exposure (lasting for a few hours) to 03 at levels typically observed in Southern California can result in breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, and some immunological changes. Elevated 03 levels are associated with increased school absences. Exposure Travertine EIR 4.3-5 October 2023 243 4.3 AIR QUALITY to ozone can result in diminished breathing capacity, increased sensitivity to infections, and inflammation of the lung tissue. Children and people with pre-existing lung disease are most susceptible to the effects of ozone. In recent years, a correlation between elevated ambient 03 levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates, as well as mortality, has also been reported. An increased risk for asthma has been found in children who participate in multiple outdoor sports and live in communities with high 03 levels. Particulate Matter (PMlo and PM2.5) consists of fine suspended particles of ten microns or smaller in diameter, and are the byproducts of road dust, sand, diesel soot, windstorms, and the abrasion of tires and brakes. PM2.5 are particles which are 2.5 microns or smaller (which is often referred to as fine particles). The elderly, children, and adults with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular disease are most susceptible to the effects of PM. Elevated PM10 and PM2.5 levels are also associated with an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections, occurrences and severity of asthma attacks, and hospital admissions. The SSAB is a non -attainment area for PM10 and is classified as attainment/unclassifiable for PM2.5. In terms of health effects, a consistent correlation between elevated ambient fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) levels and an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections, number and severity of asthma attacks and the number of hospital admissions has been observed in different parts of the United States and various areas around the world. In recent years, some studies have reported an association between long-term exposure to air pollution dominated by fine particles and increased mortality, reduction in lifespan, and an increased mortality from lung cancer. Daily fluctuations in PM2.5 concentration levels have also been related to hospital admissions for acute respiratory conditions in children, to school and kindergarten absences, to a decrease in respiratory lung volumes in normal children, and to increased medication use in children and adults with asthma. Recent studies show lung function growth in children is reduced with long term exposure to particulate matter. The elderly, people with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular diseases, and children appear to be more susceptible to the effects of high levels of PM10 and PM2.5. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) are also known as Reactive Organic Gas (ROG). This class of pollutants has no state or federal ambient air quality standards and are not classified as criteria pollutants; however, they are regulated because they are responsible for contributing to the formation of ozone. They also contribute to higher PM10 levels because they transform into organic aerosols when released into the atmosphere. Breathing VOCs can irritate the eyes, nose and throat, can cause difficulty breathing and nausea, and can damage the central nervous system as well as other organs. Some VOCs can cause cancer. Not all VOCs have all these health effects, though many have several. VOCs pose a health threat when people are exposed to high concentrations. Benzene, for example, is a hydrogen component of VOC emissions known to be a carcinogen. In terms of health effects, breathing VOCs can irritate the eyes, nose and throat, can cause difficulty breathing and Travertine EIR 4.3-6 October 2023 244 4.3 AIR QUALITY nausea, and can damage the central nervous system as well as other organs. Some VOCs can cause cancer. Not all VOCs have all these health effects, though many have several. Lead (Pb) occurs in the atmosphere as particulate matter resulting from the manufacturing of batteries, paint, ink, and ammunition. Exposure to lead can result in anemia, kidney disease, gastrointestinal dysfunction, and neuromuscular and neurological disorders. Babies in utero, infants, and children are especially susceptible to health risks associated with exposure to lead by impacting the central nervous system and causing learning disorders. The SSAB is in attainment for lead. In terms of health effects, fetuses, infants, and children are more sensitive than others to the adverse effects of Pb exposure. Exposure to low levels of Pb can adversely affect the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased Pb levels are associated with increased blood pressure. Pb poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures, and death; although it appears that there are no direct effects of Pb on the respiratory system. Pb can be stored in the bone from early age environmental exposure, and elevated blood Pb levels can occur due to breakdown of bone tissue during pregnancy, hyperthyroidism (increased secretion of hormones from the thyroid gland) and osteoporosis (breakdown of bony tissue). Fetuses and breast-fed babies can be exposed to higher levels of Pb because of previous environmental Pb exposure of their mothers. The criteria air pollutants that are most relevant to current air quality planning and regulation in the SSAB include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), respirable particulate matter (PM1o), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb). The state and AAQS and their attainment status in the SSAB for each of the criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 4.3-1, Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Under federal and state standards, the SSAB is currently designated as nonattainment for 03 and PM1o. Travertine EIR 4.3-7 October 2023 245 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status California Federal Averaging Attainment Attainment Pollutant Period Standards Standards Status Status 1-hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) Ozone (Os) Nonattainment Nonattainment 8-hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) Annual Nitrogen Arithmetic 0.03 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Unclassified/ Dioxide (NO2) mean Attainment Attainment 1-hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3) Carbon 8 hours 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) Unclassified/ Monoxide Attainment (CO) 1 hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) Attainment Sulfur Dioxide 1 hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm (SO2) Attainment Attainment 24 hour 0.04 ppm - 30-day average 1.5 µg/m3 Unclassified/ Rolling 3-month 3 0.15 µg/m Lead (Pb) Attainment Attainment average Respirable 24 hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Particulate Annual Matter Nonattainment Nonattainment 20 µg/m3 (PM10) arithmetic mean Fine 24 hour 35 µg/m3 Particulate Attainment Unclassified/ Annual arithmetic 12 pg/m3 Matter mean 12 pg/m3 Attainment (PM2.5) Source: California Air Resources Board website at: https.//www.arb.ca.gov/research/aags/aags2.pdf (accessed August 2020) and CARE, `Area Designations Maps/State and National,"http.//www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm Note: ppm = parts per million. Criteria Air Pollutant Designations Air quality in the SSAB exceeds state and federal standards for fugitive dust (PM1o) and ozone (03), as summarized below: PM10 The Coachella Valley is currently designated as a serious nonattainment area for PM10 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less). In the Coachella Valley, the man-made sources of PM10 are attributed to direct emissions, industrial facilities, and fugitive dust resulting from natural erosion, unpaved roads and construction operations. High -wind events contribute to suspended PMlo. The CAA requires those states with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit the corresponding State Implementation Plans (SIPS) to demonstrate how these areas will attain the Travertine EIR 4.3-8 October 2023 246 4.3 AIR QUALITY NAAQS. The implementation strategies include modeling, rules, regulations, and programs designed to provide the necessary air pollutant emissions reductions. Pertaining to PM10 attainment, the Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP) was approved by the U.S. EPA on December 14, 2005. It incorporated updated planning assumptions, fugitive dust source emissions estimates, mobile source emissions estimates, and attainment modeling with control strategies and commitments. Some of those measures are reflected in SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, which are enacted to reduce or prevent man-made fugitive dust sources with their associated PM10 emissions. The CVSIP established the controls needed to demonstrate expeditious attainment of the standards such as those listed below: • Additional stabilizing or paving of unpaved surfaces, including parking lots; • A prohibition on building new unpaved roads; • Requiring detailed dust control plans from builders in the valley that specify the use of more aggressive and frequent watering, soil stabilization, wind screens, and phased development (as opposed to mass grading) to minimize fugitive dust; • Designating a worker to monitor dust control at construction sites; and • Testing requirements for soil and road surfaces. On February 25, 2010, the ARB approved the 2010 Coachella Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan and transmitted it to the U.S. EPA for approval. With the recent data being collected at the Coachella Valley monitoring stations, consideration of high -wind exceptional events, and submittal of a PM10 Re -designation Request and Maintenance Plan, a re -designation to attainment status of the PM10 NAAQS is deemed feasible according to the 2016 AQMP and draft 2022 AQMP. Nonetheless, the regional remains in non -attainment for PM1o. The Project property includes areas that have been disturbed by prior agricultural operations, including now -fallow fields and dirt roads. Lands within the Project off -site utility field are comprised primarily of agricultural lands, both active and fallow. Like other unpaved or undeveloped areas of the Coachella Valley, the undeveloped and inactive Project property, and active and fallow off -site utility field lands are likely sources of comparable seasonal PM10 emissions in the presence of seasonal high winds events. 03 (Ozone and Ozone Precursors) Ozone (03) is a photochemical oxidant formed through chemical reactions of VOC, NOx, and oxygen in the presence of sunlight. The Coachella Valley portion of the SSAB is deemed to be in nonattainment for the state and federal 1-hour and 8-hour ozone averaging standard. Coachella Valley is located downwind from the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). As such, when high levels of ozone and ozone precursors are formed in the South Coast Air Basin, they are transported to the Coachella Valley. The reactions that form ozone begin at sunrise and require sunlight to proceed. Peak ozone Travertine EIR 4.3-9 October 2023 247 4.3 AIR QUALITY concentrations tend to occur in the SCAB between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m. during the summer and early fall, when the solar radiation exposure of the air mass is the greatest. Ozone and ozone precursors are then transported downwind as the photochemical reactions continue to occur. In areas downwind of the source region like Palm Springs, peak ozone concentrations occur in the late afternoon and early evening (between 5:00 and 6:00 p.m.). Similarly, when ozone precursors such as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted from mobile sources and stationary sources located in the South Coast Air Basin, they are also transported to the Coachella Valley. SCAQMD has acknowledged that ozone exceedances in the Coachella Valley are primarily due to the direct transport of ozone and its precursors from the. Nonetheless, SCAQMD has also determined that local sources of air pollution generated in the Coachella Valley have a limited impact on ozone levels compared to the transport of ozone precursors generated in SCAB. As part of the districtwide ozone reduction efforts, SCAQMD has adopted various rules to reduce ozone precursors. These include Rule 1121 (Control of Nitrogen Oxides from Residential Type Natural Gas -Fired Water Heaters), Rule 1147 (NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources), Rule 1146 (Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters), Rule 1146.2 (Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers and Process Heaters). Where relevant, the applicability of such rules was factored into the AQIA and related findings. 2016 AQMP The Final 2016 AQMP was approved on March 3, 2017 to serve as the regional air quality plan with integrated strategies and measures for stationary and mobile sources to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and therefore ensure that public health is protected to the maximum extent feasible. The 2016 AQMP relies on a thorough analysis of existing and potential regulatory control options, includes available, proven, and cost-effective strategies, and seeks to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions in greenhouse gases and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The 2016 AQMP also includes transportation control measures developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) from the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy. The 2016 AQMP builds on the foundational work that went into the prior 2012 AQMP, but is a reflection of the of the attainment status, timelines, and state implementation plan strategies relevant to the time period. Specifically, the 2016 AQMP works toward the attainment of the 1-hr and 8-hr ozone NAAQS as well as the latest 24-hr and annual PM2.5 standards. The relevant goals and strategies may be carried over to future plans. 2022 AQMP The 2022 AQMP will become state and federally enforceable upon approval by CARB and the U.S. EPA, respectively. The CARB Board of Directors approved the 2022 AQMD on January 26, 2023. EPA Travertine EIR 4.3-10 October 2023 248 4.3 AIR QUALITY approval is pending. The 2022 AQMP builds upon and supersedes the 2016 AQMP with updated strategies toward air quality attainment, while recognizing the challenges from experiencing the worst levels of ground -level ozone (smog) and among the highest levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the nation, despite the progress in air pollution reduction. The 2022 AQMP also recognizes the Coachella Valley's failure to meet federal ozone standards due to transport of pollution from the upwind South Coast Air Basin. As a result, the updated strategies focus on reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) — the key pollutant that creates ozone — by 67 percent more than is required by adopted rules and regulations in 2037. This is to be achieved in part through the extensive use of zero emission technologies across all stationary and mobile sources, combined with additional controls over stationary sources that currently account for approximately 20 percent of NOx emissions. The 2022 AQMP recognize that the overwhelming majority of NOx emissions are from heavy-duty trucks, ships and other State and federally regulated mobile sources that are mostly beyond the South Coast AQMD's control, so federal regulatory action will help toward the AQMP goals. The current AQMP does not involve numeric revisions to the South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, nor is it understood to implement land use and land development restrictions. SCAQMD Rules SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), Rule 403.1 (Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources), and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) are applicable to the proposed Project. Rule 403 requires the use of stringent Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) to minimize PM10 emissions during grading and construction activities. Rule 1113 requires reductions in the VOC content of coatings, with a substantial reduction in the VOC content. Additional details regarding these rules and other potentially applicable rules are presented as follows. Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement BACMs for all sources and prohibits all forms of visible particulate matter from crossing any property line. This may include application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph), sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph, and establishing a permanent ground cover on finished sites. SCAQMD Rule 403 is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust (see also Rule 1186). Rule 403.1 (Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources) This rule requires the reduction or prevention of the amount of PMlo emitted in the ambient air from man-made fugitive dust sources. The provisions of this rule are supplemental to Rule 403 and apply Travertine EIR 4.3-11 October 2023 249 4.3 AIR QUALITY only to fugitive dust sources in the Coachella Valley. In addition, this rule requires a fugitive dust control plan for construction projects with a disturbed surface area of more than five thousand (5,000) square feet. Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce VOC emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the VOC content of various coating categories. SCAQMD Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook In 1993, SCAQMD prepared its CEQA Air Quality Handbook to assist local government agencies and consultants in preparing environmental documents for projects subject to CEQA. The CEQA Handbook and the Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook describe the criteria that SCAQMD uses when reviewing and commenting on the adequacy of environmental documents. The Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook provides the recommended thresholds of significance in order to determine if a project will have a significant adverse environmental impact. Other important subjects covered in the CEQA Handbook and the Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook include methodologies for estimating project emissions and mitigation measures that can be implemented to avoid or reduce air quality impacts. Although the Governing Board of SCAQMD has adopted the CEQA Handbook and is in the process of developing an update to the Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook, SCAQMD does not intend to supersede a local jurisdiction's CEQA procedures. The most recent SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds table was updated in April of 2019. Eastern Coachella Valley Community Emissions Reduction Plan The Project property is located within the coverage area of the Eastern Coachella Valley (ECV) Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP), approved in July of 2021 to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 617, which was signed into law in 2017 to address the disproportionate impacts of air pollution in environmental justice communities. The ECV boundary under AB 617 includes portions of the City of La Quinta among other communities and jurisdictions. The CERP was developed to achieve air pollution emission and exposure reductions within the ECV community and address this community's air quality concerns. The plan describes the community outreach conducted to develop the CERP and provides emissions and exposure reduction actions, an implementation schedule, and an enforcement plan. The CERP finds that the primary sources of air pollution emissions in the ECV community are on -road vehicles, farming equipment, trains, off -road equipment, and certain industrial activities. The ECV is also deemed to be highly impacted by the declining Salton Sea levels, resulting in increasing dust emissions from the Salton Sea playa. Travertine EIR 4.3-12 October 2023 250 4.3 AIR QUALITY To protect public health, the CERP identifies efforts for improved monitoring, collaboration, and enforcement activities to be undertaken by the various responsible public agencies across the ECV community, primarily California Air Resources Board (CARB), South Coast AQMD, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), and Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner (CAC). The CERP does involve new air quality thresholds of significance, rules, development standards or other conditions on new development, but rather points to the opportunities for monitoring, collaboration and enforcement to be undertaken primarily by CARB and South Coast AQMD to address air pollution sources, as applicable per their jurisdictions. The most notable concerns potentially applicable to new development are 1) pesticides, 2) fugitive road dust and off-roading, and 3) open burning/illegal dumping. Concerns pertaining to industrial development are not relevant to the Project setting or proposed operation. City of La Quinta-s Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control) of the La Quinta Municipal Code has been enacted to establish the minimum requirements for construction and demolition activities and other specified sources in order to reduce man-made fugitive dust and the corresponding PM10 emissions. The corresponding performance standards are based upon the methodologies included in the Coachella Valley Dust Control Handbook, prepared in accordance with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1. The City's Fugitive Dust Control ordinance and plan implementation requirements are consistent with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1 that apply to the Coachella Valley strategy for reducing fugitive dust emissions. Under the City's dust control regulations, a Local Air Quality Management Plan (LAQMP) must be prepared and approved for this Project prior to any grading, earth -moving, demolition, or building operation with a disturbed surface area of more than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The LAQMP requirement is not specific to the Project, but rather applicable to any activity reaching the threshold for land disturbance. Consistent with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, implementation of the Fugitive Dust Control Plan is required to occur under the supervision of an individual with training on Dust Control in the Coachella Valley. The plan will include methods to prevent sediment track -out onto public roads, prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding a 20-percent opacity, and prevent visible dust emissions from extending more than 100 feet (vertically or horizontally from the origin of a source) or crossing any property line. The most widely used measures include proper construction phasing, proper maintenance/cleaning of construction equipment, soil stabilization, installation of track -out prevention devices, and wind fencing. The Project property includes approximately 220 acres of inactive vineyards with unpaved access roads that, like other unpaved areas of the Coachella Valley, are probably sources of PM10 in the presence of higher winds speeds. 4.3.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance Travertine EIR 4.3-13 October 2023 251 4.3 AIR QUALITY The following thresholds or criteria are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effect. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, buildout of the project would have a significant effect on air quality emissions if it is determined that the project will: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Methodology As previously introduced, the air quality findings are based primarily on the Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA) and the Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), dated January 31, 2023. The scope of the AQIA evaluated the potential impacts to air quality associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project utilizing the CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 as the current and prescribed software method for quantifying emissions at the time of the initial AQIA preparation and NOP publication. The AQ and GHG Memorandum was prepared in part to ascertain operation emissions using the more current version of CalEEMod (2022.1) that has been released since the NOP. The construction -related emissions calculated with CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 were not revisited using the new software version, as they were not anticipated to yield a change to the findings of significance. The said technical studies accounted for emissions generated from off -site improvements that will support the proposed development, including a substation, domestic water wells, and street improvements, as depicted in the Project description. These improvements are within a planning area subject to programmatic -level evaluation in this document. The underlying AQIA and associated emissions calculations initially accounted for up to 9 well sites as a conservative measure. The actual number of well sites is expected to be 5, but the larger quantity is retained for analysis purposes. Construction of these facilities will be subject to regulatory dust control plan preparation and applicable mitigation measures. The AQIA also used the following factors as part of the methodology: Road Construction Emissions Model (RCEM): Project specific sources resulting from Madison Avenue, Avenue 62, and Jefferson construction activities are estimated utilizing the most recent RCEM Version 9.0. RCEM was developed by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District as part Travertine EIR 4.3-14 October 2023 252 4.3 AIR QUALITY of their CEQA Guidelines and Tools to analyze new road construction, road widening, bridge/overpass construction, and other linear projects. SCAQMD has identified the RCEM as an acceptable emissions modeling program. Based on the nature of the Project, emissions associated with the construction of the Madison Avenue, Avenue 62, and Jefferson are considered within the scope of this assessment Emissions Factors Model (EMFAC): This AQIA utilizes the EPA -approved summer, winter, and annual EMFAC2017 emission factors in order to derive vehicle emissions associated with Project operational activities, which vary by season. EMFAC2017 is an approved mathematical model that was developed to calculate emission rates, fuel consumption, VMT from motor vehicles that operate on highways, freeways, and local roads in California and is commonly used by the CARB to Project changes in future emissions from on -road mobile sources. The SCAQMD has developed regional significance thresholds for regulated pollutants, as summarized at Table 4.3-2. The SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds (April 2019) indicate that any projects in the SSAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. Table 4.3-2 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (Pounds/Day) Emission Source CO VOC NO, SOX PMlo PMz.s Construction or 550 75 100 150 150 55 Operation Source: South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, April 2019 Project Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? A significant air quality impact could occur if the Project is not consistent with the applicable Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) or would obstruct the implementation of the policies or hinder reaching the goals of that plan. The Project will comply with the regulations and mitigation measures set forth in the 2003 CV PM10 SIP. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with either the AQMP or the CV PM10 SIP. Currently, state and federal air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter are exceeded in most parts of the SSAB. Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993 CEQA Handbook). The Project's consistency with these criteria is discussed below: Consistency Criterion 1: The proposed project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. Travertine EIR 4.3-15 October 2023 253 4.3 AIR QUALITY Construction Impacts — Consistency Criterion 1: The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to are the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations, which would occur if the Project caused regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. The Project would not exceed or cause the exceedance of the applicable regional significance thresholds or LST thresholds. Therefore, construction emission associated with the Project will not conflict with either the AQMP or the CV PMio SIP and a less than significant impact is expected. Operational Impacts — Consistency Criterion 1: CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. Project operations have the potential to exceed the applicable thresholds for VOCs starting in Phase 2 through Phase 3. The majority of VOC emissions are derived from consumer products and mobile sources. The control of such sources is primarily linked to CARB regulations. Specifically, VOC emissions from mobile sources are attributed primarily to CARB's vehicle emissions standards, while consumer product VOC sources are regulated under CARB's Consumer Products Regulatory Program. CARB is continually reviewing and implementing strategies to lower vehicle emissions and reactivity of household products, such as cleaning supplies and aerosols. The Project operations are not precluded from being regulated or forming part of future statewide controls over these sources. However, until such measures are in place, it is necessary to implement various air quality mitigation measures aimed at reducing VMTs and the presence of volatile organic compounds in applicable consumer products, as presented in MM AQ-3 through AQ- 10. The Project also incorporates Mitigation Measure MM AQ-2, prompting the applicant to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445 by prohibiting the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development, therefore eliminating the source of VOCs that would otherwise be present in woodburning devices. Even after implementation of the said measures and mitigation aimed at reducing VOCs, the Project may not be able to achieve a sufficient reduction to comply with the applicable SCAQMD threshold and would therefore result in or cause violations of the CAAQS and NAAQS. Consistency Criterion 2: The project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of Project build -out phase. The 2016 AQMP and 2022 AQMP identify enforceable control strategies which demonstrate that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the timeframes required under federal law. The 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS) while 2022 AQMP relies on the more recent 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, which was adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in September of 2020. Growth projections from local general plans adopted by cities in the district are provided to the SCAG, which develops regional population growth forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality forecasts for the AQMP. Development consistent with the growth projections in City of La Quinta General Plan is considered to be consistent with the 2016 and the 2022 AQMP. As concluded Travertine EIR 4.3-16 October 2023 254 4.3 AIR QUALITY in the Population and Housing section, the Project could potentially result in a 7.6 percent population increase of the current City population, which is less than the approved specific plan and is consistent with City and regional growth projections. Additionally, the population increase associated with the Project would account for approximately 33 percent of the remaining capacity for population growth anticipated by SCAG in their 2016-2040 RTC/SCS and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Please refer to Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this DEIR for the analysis of Project consistency analysis with the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS. Construction Impacts — Consistency Criterion 2: Peak daily emissions generated by construction activities are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance. Since the proposed Project would not increase the developable area or the sources of construction emissions the Project's construction emissions are considered consistent with the City's adopted General Plan, and thus consistent with the AQMP. Operational Impacts —Consistency Criterion 2: As previously stated, the current General Plan and Zoning designations on the property are Low Density Residential (RL), Medium High Density Residential (RMH), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Tourist Commercial (CT), and Golf Course (GC). RL land uses are appropriate for single family residential development, whether attached or detached. These land uses are typically developed as subdivisions, country club developments, or master planned communities. RMH land uses accommodate a broad range of residential uses, including small -lot subdivisions, duplex, condominium and apartment projects. CN land uses can include the development of supermarkets and drugstores in a neighborhood shopping center, to major national retailers in large buildings. Uses can also include professional offices, service business, restaurants, hotels or motels, research and development and warehousing or similar low impact quasi -industrial projects. CT land use designations are specifically geared to tourism -related land uses, such as resort hotels, hotels and motels, and resort commercial development, such as conference centers, restaurants, resort - supporting retail and services. GC land use designations applies to parks, recreation facilities, public and private golf courses. The Project proposes to amend the previously approved Travertine Specific Plan, which includes a General Plan Amendment to make the proposed land use designations and City General Plan consistent. The proposed mixed -use Project consists of approximately 758 single family detached residential homes, 442 duplex residential units, a 100-room resort hotel, and other resort/golf facilities, which are permitted under the City's General Plan land use and zoning designations. The proposed Project will result in an overall reduction in Project intensity compared to the previously approved Specific Plan, Project buildout would exceed the applicable SCAQMD regional threshold for operational -source activity for emissions of VOCs. Therefore, Project operational -source VOCs emissions exceedances of applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds are considered significant. The Travertine EIR 4.3-17 October 2023 255 4.3 AIR QUALITY DEIR identifies feasible mitigation measures to reduce VOCs emissions. However, even with the implementation of mitigation measures, emissions are still expected to exceed thresholds and therefore be potentially significant and unavoidable. Eastern Coachella Valley Community Emissions Reduction Plan: As previously introduced, the Project is located within the Eastern Coachella Valley (ECV) Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP), approved by SCAQMD in July of 2021. The CERP was developed to achieve air pollution emission and exposure reductions within the ECV community and address this community's air quality priorities. The CERP calls for coordination by various agencies, including CARB and South Coast AQMD, to improve air monitoring, collaboration and enforcement across various sectors to address the primary areas of concern, which include emissions from fugitive road dust, off-roading, farming equipment, trains, and certain conditions involving pesticides, fugitive road dust and off-roading, and open burning/illegal dumping. Pesticides: The ECV community is deemed to have a large amount of agricultural activity with associated use of pesticides that has raised concerns over the adverse health effects. The CERP recognizes that CARB, South Coast AQMD, Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), and Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) are to be responsible for undertaking continued research and air monitoring to identify exposure reductions. The proposed development does not involve agricultural activity. The former vineyard facilities became fallow prior to and independent of the Project proposal. Any use of pesticides in the proposed landscaping and golf course activities will be regulated by the applicable product requirements and standards for handling and application. Therefore, Project implementation would not conflict with or obstruct CERP implementation to address this community concern. Fugitive Road Dust and Off-Roading: The CERP identifies a concern over inhalable particulate matter (PM1o) emitted from unpaved and paved roadways and from dust resuspended by off -road vehicles. To address community concerns about emissions from fugitive road dust and off-roading in ECV, the CERP has identified additional agency monitoring and enforcement efforts, combined with opportunities to implement paving to reduced unpaved travel. The proposed development will include formal street improvements, such that off -road or unpaved vehicular travel will not be a routine Project activity or function. Access roads for maintenance operations will be stabilized with surface compaction and its vehicular access will be restricted access to authorized personnel for inspection, maintenance, and repair purposes, as applicable. Therefore, Project implementation would not introduce or increase off -road vehicular travel in a manner that would conflict with or obstruct CERP implementation to address this community concern. Open Burning and Illegal Dumping: The CERP identified as concern over agricultural burning, particularly associated with grapes, dates, citrus, and other crops. To address community concerns about open burning and illegal dumping emissions and exposures, the CERP has identified additional Travertine EIR 4.3-18 October 2023 256 4.3 AIR QUALITY agency monitoring and enforcement efforts, combined with pursuing opportunities to work with agricultural operators for reduced open burning activities. The proposed development will not involve agricultural uses capable of involving open burning activities. The former vineyards occupying a portion of the Project property will be removed from the property for proper disposal. Instances of illegal dumping will be prevented as the proposed community becomes operational compared to its undeveloped condition. Therefore, Project implementation would not conflict with or obstruct CERP implementation to address this community concern. For the above reasons, while the Project proposes a reduced development relative to the previously approved Travertine Specific Plan, because Project operations would result in potentially significant and unavoidable VOC emissions, the Project would conflict with implementation of the AQMP. b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? As previously introduced, the methodology for calculating Project -related construction -source and operational -source emissions as part of the AQIA used CaIEEMod software. The two identified criteria pollutants for which the SSAB is in non -attainment are ozone and particulate matter. As discussed below, the Project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in particulate matter emissions during Project construction. However, the Project will result in a cumulatively considerable increase in VOC emissions, which is an ozone precursor during Project operations. Accordingly, the Project will result in a potentially significant impact to air quality as a result of ozone precursor emissions. As discussed in the Air Quality Standards section, certain health effects are attributed to VOCs and ozone. For example, exposure to ozone is known to result in diminished breathing capacity, increased sensitivity to infections, and inflammation of the lung tissue, with greater susceptibility experienced by children and people with existing lung disease. As a precursor to ozone, VOCs can irritate the eyes, nose and throat, can cause difficulty breathing and nausea, and can damage the central nervous system as well as other organs. The nature of VOC emissions from the Project will not occur in a concentrated manner from a given point source facility, but rather as a combined total from dispersed land use and mobile emissions attributed to the dwelling units, resort, and golf facilities. The majority of VOC emissions are derived from consumer products and from mobile sources. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, aerosols, and other consumer products, while mobile emissions are those resulting from traffic. Potential exceedances to VOC emissions would not take place during implementation of Phase 1 but would be observed upon operation of Phases 2 and 3 as the combined sources increase toward Project buildout. There is an expectation that future regulations in vehicle emissions and VOC content in consumer products would continue to lower the emissions contribution from such sources. Travertine EIR 4.3-19 October 2023 257 4.3 AIR QUALITY The AQMP 2022 indicates that emission reductions will be achieved by setting regulatory standards applicable to the content of consumer products under CARB. For context, although consumer products small amounts of VOCs, Californians use over half a billion of these items every year. CARB staff will continue to evaluate categories with relatively high contributions to ozone formation, whether currently regulated or unregulated, to consider the merits of proposing VOC content standards as well as reactivity limits. CARB is also expected to develop amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation and consider investigating concepts for expanding manufacturer compliance options, market -based approaches, and reviewing existing exemptions. The intent will be for CARB to encourage the development, distribution, and sale of cleaner, very low, or zero -emitting products that achieve the maximum feasible reductions in ozone forming, toxic air contaminant, and GHG emissions. This measure complements a parallel measure in CARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, to be considered by the CARB Board in 2022, to phase down use of HFC- 152a and other GHGs in consumer products. However, the implementation of consumer product regulation is beyond the Project's ability to mitigate. Therefore, until VOC reduction measures are implemented on consumer products in response to CARB regulations, the known health effects of VOCs may be experienced by the local population, upon implementation of Phase 2. These potential effects include irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat based on the manner in which such products are individually used or applied. Construction Emissions The most intense period of construction activities and one where maximum potential emissions will occur are associated with Phase I development. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project include rock crushing, excavations and mass grading, a wide range of other construction activities and haul trips and other sources of moving emissions. Total earthwork for Phase A Grading is 5,003,741 cubic yards (cut and remedial) and 7,171,789 cubic yards (cut and remedial) for Phase B Grading. Based on consultation with the Project Engineer, the Project will not generate hauling trips as material will be used onsite. All associated grading and ground disturbance will be subject to the regulatory dust control plan preparation and applicable measures during the period of implementation. As a standard requirement, all disturbed surfaces associated with this work will either be stabilized through permanent improvements. Disturbed surfaces that do not involve permanent improvements shall be restored to a stabilized condition, such as restoration of existing pavement, hardscape, landscaping, or the application of soil binder on exposed soils. Crushing Activities: It is our understanding that the Project property proposes on -site crushing activity during grading activity. Based on information provided by the Project engineer, it is anticipated that the Project will process approximately 691,944 tons of debris during Phase A Grading and 1,006,814 tons of debris during Phase B. The crushed rock will be utilized onsite and will not be exported off - Travertine EIR 4.3-20 October 2023 258 4.3 AIR QUALITY site and therefore no export activities are anticipated. The type of crusher will be a mobile unit, anticipated to consist of Sandvik QJ331, Anaconda TD516, or similar. For purposes of analysis, a 350 horsepower Sandvik QJ331 has been modeled. The duration of crushing activity is anticipated to occur over 230 working days and 336 working days for Phase A and B grading, respectively. For purposes of analysis, crushing activities will overlap with grading. As such, emissions associated with the crushing operation were calculated using CalEEMod and the emissions were then added to the Phase A and B grading activities. Crushing equipment is required to have proper registration with CARB under the Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP). Short-term operation of crushing equipment is required to implement methods and efficacy for control of particulate emissions, including water sprays, bag house/dust collector, on -site water truck, or other method subject to CARB approval. Construction Worker Vehicle Trips: Construction emissions for construction worker vehicles traveling to and from the Project property, as well as vendor trips (construction materials delivered to the Project property) were estimated based on information from CalEEMod defaults. Construction Duration: The construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 4.3-3, represents a "worst -case" analysis scenario because if construction were to occur any time after the assumed phase start times, emissions factors and resulting emissions rates for construction equipment would decrease as a result of increasingly more stringent regulatory requirements. It is anticipated that the construction start time, and the subsequent phasing would occur later than is shown in Table 4.3-3, however, the duration and sequencing of the construction phases will remain as shown in Table 4.3-3.. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines. The duration of construction activity was based on the buildout year of each phase. Table 4.3-3 Construction Duration Phase Start Date End Date Phase A Grading Activities (Crushing, Madison Avenue with Water Line, Grading & Tank Construction, Avenue 62 with Water Line, Well Construction, Substation Construction) 07/01/2023 07/01/2025 Phase B Grading Activities 01/01/2024 03/30/2028 Phase 1(2026-2029) 07/01/2025 12/11/2028 Phase 2(2029-2031) 01/01/2029 12/13/2030 Phase 3 (2031-2033) 01/01/2031 12/28/2032 Refer to Table 3-2 (Construction Duration) in the AQIA report for detailed construction duration information. Construction Equipment: Site specific construction fleet may vary due to specific Project needs at the time of construction. The associated construction equipment was generally based on CaIEEMod defaults. A summary of construction equipment assumptions by phase is provided in Table 4.3-4. Travertine EIR 4.3-21 October 2023 259 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-4 Construction Equipment Assumptions Phase Equipment Type Crushing/Processing Equipment, Crawler Tractors, Excavators, Signal Boards, Off - Highway Tractors, Rollers, Rubber Tired, Loaders, Scrapers, Signal Boards, Tractors/Loaders/, Backhoes, Air Compressors, Phase A Grading Activities Generator Sets, Graders, Plate Compactors, Pumps, Rough Terrain Forklifts, Pavers, Paving Equipment, Rubber Tired Dozers, Bore/Drill Rig, Other Construction, Aerial Lift, Dumpers/Tenders, Generator Sets, Plate, Compactor, Skid Steer, Sweeper/Scrubber Crushing/Processing Equipment, Crawler Tractors, Excavators, Graders, Rubber Tired Phase B Grading Activities Dozers, Scrapers, Signal Boards, Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes, Rough Terrain Forklifts, Pumps, Plate Compactors, Generator Sets, Pavers, Paving Equipment, Phase 1 (2026-2029) Crawler Tractors, Rubber Tired Dozers, Excavators, Graders, Rubber Tired Dozers, Phase 2 (2029-2031) Scrapers, Cranes, Forklifts, Generator Sets, Phase 3 (2031-2033) Welders, Pavers, Paving Equipment, Rollers, Air Compressors Refer to Table 3-3 (Construction Equipment Assumptions) in the AQIA report for detailed information on construction equipment type, quantity, and hours of operation per day. Regional Construction Emissions Summary Without Mitigation: The estimated maximum daily construction emissions are summarized on Table 4.3-5. Prior to implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, emissions resulting from the Project construction will exceed thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of NOx during construction activity. With Mitigation: The Project will implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1, which would reduce the severity of the NOx impacts through the requirement of meeting EPA/CARB Tier 4 off -road emissions standards applicable to off -road diesel construction equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, that is utilized during the substation construction activities. As shown in Table 4.3-6, after implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, Project construction -source emissions of NOx would be reduced to less than the applicable SCAQMD thresholds. Travertine EIR 4.3-22 October 2023 260 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Unmitigated) Construction Activities Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NO)( CO SO. PMIo PM2.s Phase A Grading Activities Crushing 1.19 5.91 5.20 0.02 15.13 2.46 Madison Avenue with Water Line 3.98 41.73 28.56 0.07 6.26 3.10 Grading & Tank Construction 3.95 38.34 37.82 0.09 51.64 11.87 Avenue 62 with Water line 3.89 37.97 37.44 0.09 51.62 11.85 Well Construction Well #1 11.13 97.75 139.22 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #2 11.13 97.74 139.21 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #3 11.13 97.74 139.21 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #4 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #5 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #6 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #7 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Well #8 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Well #9 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Substation Construction Substation Construction 21.36 165.80 165.76 0.51 7.77 6.21 Phase B Grading Activities Crushing 1.07 4.52 5.17 0.02 14.62 2.34 Grading 3.44 33.21 26.47 0.07 5.92 2.78 Jefferson with Water Line 3.69 33.50 37.02 0.09 51.43 11.67 Physical Construction Phase 1 23.79 36.27 40.46 0.11 10.75 5.51 Phase 2 19.28 35.74 37.94 0.10 10.75 5.51 Phase 3 21.78 23.63 40.01 0.12 9.88 4.75 Maximum Daily Emissions 23.79 165.80 165.76 0.51 51.64 11.87 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO YES NO NO NO NO Travertine EIR 4.3-23 October 2023 261 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-6 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Mitigated) Construction Activities Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NO. CO SO. PMlo PM2.5 Phase A Grading Activities Crushing 1.19 5.91 5.20 0.02 15.13 2.46 Madison Avenue with Water Line 3.98 41.73 28.56 0.07 6.26 3.10 Grading & Tank Construction 3.95 38.34 37.82 0.09 51.64 11.87 Avenue 62 with Water line 3.89 37.97 37.44 0.09 51.62 11.85 Well Construction Well #1 11.13 97.75 139.22 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #2 11.13 97.74 139.21 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #3 11.13 97.74 139.21 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #4 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #5 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #6 11.13 97.74 139.20 0.26 4.53 4.19 Well #7 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Well #8 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Well #9 9.48 37.86 138.99 0.31 1.18 1.15 Substation Construction Substation Construction 7.81 1 43.80 1 251.59 0.51 4.23 2.28 Phase B Grading Activities Crushing 1.07 4.52 5.17 0.02 14.62 2.34 Grading & Tank Construction 3.44 33.21 26.47 0.07 5.92 2.78 Jefferson with Water Line 3.69 33.50 37.02 0.09 51.43 11.67 Physical Construction Phase 1 23.79 36.27 40.46 0.11 10.75 5.51 Phase 2 19.28 35.74 37.94 0.10 10.75 5.51 Phase 3 21.78 23.63 40.01 0.12 9.88 4.75 Maximum Daily Emissions 23.79 97.75 251.59 0.51 51.64 11.87 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Operational Emissions Operational activities associated with the proposed Project will result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM1o, and PM2.5. Operational emissions would be expected from Area Sources, Energy Sources, and Mobile Sources. Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-24 October 2022 262 4.3 AIR QUALITY Area Source Emissions Architectural Coatings: Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project will be subject to emissions resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints, varnishes, primers, and other surface coatings as part of Project maintenance. The emissions associated with architectural coatings were calculated using CaIEEMod. Consumer Products: Consumer products include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes, personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these products contain organic compounds which when released in the atmosphere can react to form ozone and other photochemically reactive pollutants. The emissions associated with use of consumer products were calculated based on defaults provided within CalEEMod. Hearths/Fireplaces: The emissions associated with use of hearths/fireplaces were calculated based on assumptions provided in CaIEEMod. The Project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which prohibits the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in new development. In order to account for the requirements of this Rule, the unmitigated CaIEEMod default estimates were adjusted to remove wood burning stoves and fireplaces. Mitigation Measure AQ-2 requires compliance with SCAQMD Rule 445. Landscape Maintenance Equipment: Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the landscaping of the Project. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in CaIEEMod. Energy Source Emissions Combustion Emissions Associated with Natural Gas and Electricity: Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because electrical generating facilities for the Project area are located either outside the region (state) or offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the SCAB, criteria pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity are generally excluded from the evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered. The emissions associated with natural gas use were calculated using CaIEEMod. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity. The 2019 version of Title 24 was adopted by the CEC and became effective on January 1, 2020. The CEC anticipates that, under the 2019 standards, new development of residential buildings will use approximately 53% less energy and nonresidential buildings will use approximately Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-25 October 2022 263 4.3 AIR QUALITY 30% less energy compared to the 2016 standards. It should be noted that future building codes will require zero net construction and that the Project would likely be built to comply with those standards. However, as no specific standards have been proposed, this analysis conservatively reflects the 2019 Title 24 standards. As such, the CalEEMod defaults for Title 24 — Electricity, Title 24 — Natural Gas, and Lighting Energy were reduced by 30% for nonresidential uses and 53% for residential uses to reflect consistency with the 2019 Title 24 standard. Mobile Source Emissions The Project -related operational air quality impacts are derived primarily from vehicle trips generated by the Project. Trip characteristics provided by the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis report were utilized in this analysis. Fugitive Dust Related to Vehicular Travel: Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation of road dust inclusive of brake and tire wear particulates. The emissions estimates for travel on paved roads were calculated using CalEEMod. Regional Operational Emissions Summary: As previously stated, CalEEMod utilizes summer and winter EMFAC2017 emission factors to derive vehicle emissions associated with Project operational activities, which vary by season. Table 4.3-7 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (Unmitigated) (1 of 2) Summer Scenario Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NO. CO SO), PM,o PMz.s Phase 1 (2026) Total Maximum Daily Emissions 64.60 35.78 303.16 0.55 15.92 4.17 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Phase 2 (2029)1 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 82.41 47.56 374.00 0.76 23.00 5.96 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? YES NO NO NO NO NO Phase 3 (2031) 2 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 96.84 62.30 407.94 1.00 31.34 8.01 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? YES NO NO NO NO NO Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-26 October 2022 264 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-7 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (Unmitigated) (2 of 2) Winter Scenario Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NO. CO SO. PMl. PM2.5 Phase 1 (2026) Total Maximum Daily Emissions 46.30 36.58 142.42 0.49 15.82 4.04 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Phase 2 (2029)1 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 61.81 48.56 181.42 0.69 22.89 5.82 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Phase 3 (2031) 2 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 83.04 64.20 233.21 0.92 31.30 7.96 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? YES NO NO NO NO NO `Emissions for Phase 2 operational emissions are inclusive of Phase 1. ' Emissions for Phase 3 operational emissions are inclusive of Phases 1 and 2. Note: Each phase accounts for the total Area Source, Energy Source, and Mobile Source emissions. Refer to Table 3-6 (Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (Unmitigated)) of the AQIA for a full version of the table. Operational activities for summer and winter scenarios are presented in Table 4.3-7. During Phases 1, the Project's unmitigated operational emissions would not exceed any of the numerical thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD. Upon implementation and operation of Phase 2 and continuing to Phase 3, the aggregate of previous phases of the Project will exceed the thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC. It is important to note that the majority of VOC emissions are derived from consumer products, followed by mobile sources. For analytical purposes, consumer products include cleaning supplies, aerosols, and other consumer products. Pertaining to operations, the Project incorporates Mitigation Measure MM AQ-2, prompting the applicant to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445 (Wood - Burning Devices) by prohibiting the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development. The purpose of this rule by SCAQMD is to reduce the emission of particulate matter from woodburning devices for the reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Therefore, implementation of MM AQ-2 would employ the available compliance measure to help reduce the contribution to VOCs and ozone but would not result in a numeric reduction capable of off -setting the various sources of VOCs associated with the Project. As such, the Project cannot meaningfully control the use of consumer products. On this basis, it is concluded that Project operational -source VOC emissions cannot be definitively reduced below applicable SCQMD thresholds. Therefore, pertaining to Regional Operational Emissions, operational emission levels associated with Phase 1 would be below the established thresholds and would be considered less than significant, but buildout of the Project with all three phases is expected to result in potentially significant impacts. Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-27 October 2022 265 4.3 AIR QUALITY C. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The analysis makes use of methodology included in the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology). The SCAQMD has established that impacts to air quality are significant if there is a potential to contribute or cause localized exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS. Collectively, these are referred to as LSTs. LSTs were developed in response to environmental justice and health concerns regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities. To address the issue of localized significance, the SCAQMD adopted LSTs that show whether a Project would cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts and thereby cause or contribute to potential localized adverse health effects. Applicability of LSTs for the Project For this Project, the appropriate SRA for the LST analysis is the SCAQMD Coachella Valley 2 (SRA 30). LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM1o, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD look -up tables for projects less than or equal to 5 acres in size were used. In order to determine the appropriate methodology for determining localized impacts that could occur as a result of Project -related construction, the Project's construction emissions were summarized and compared against the applicable LST Thresholds while taking into account the Project size and proximity to the nearest receptor. Emissions Considered SCAQMD's LST Methodology states that "off -site mobile emissions from the project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs." Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod "on -site" emissions outputs were considered. Maximum Daily Disturbed -Acreage: As a conservative measure, it is assumed that a maximum of 1 acre can be disturbed per day during the Well Construction (Site Preparation and Trenching) construction activities. For purposes of analysis, LSTs for a 1-acre site will be used as a screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is required. For Phase A Crushing (Demolition), Grading, Madison Avenue with Water Line, Avenue 62 with Water Line, Jefferson with Water Line, Substation Construction (Demolition and Grading), Phase 2 Crushing (Demolition), Grading, Phases 1 through 3 Physical Construction (Site Preparation and Grading) activities would disturb 5 acres per day. The LST Methodology provides look -up tables for sites with an area with daily disturbance of 5 acres or less. For projects that exceed 5 acres, the 5-acre LST look -up tables can be used as a screening tool to determine which pollutants require additional detailed analysis. This approach is conservative as it assumes that all on -site emissions associated with the Project would occur within a concentrated 5-acre area. This screening method would therefore over -predict potential localized impacts by assuming that on -site construction activities are occurring over a smaller area, and Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-28 October 2022 266 4.3 AIR QUALITY the resulting concentrations of air pollutants would be more highly concentrated (less dispersal) at the smaller disturbed area boundary than they would be for activities that are spread out over a larger surface area. On a larger site, the same amount of air pollutants generated would disperse over a larger surface area and would result in a lower concentration once emissions reach the Project -property boundary. As such, LSTs for a 5-acre site during construction are used as a screening tool to determine if further detailed analysis is required. Sensitive Receptors: As previously stated, LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a Project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable NAAQS and CAAQS at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor. Receptor locations are off -site locations where individuals may be exposed to emissions from Project activities. Residential Receptors: Some people are especially sensitive to air pollution and are given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These groups of people include children, the elderly, individuals with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise. Structures that house these persons or places where they gather to exercise are defined as "sensitive receptors". These structures typically include residences, hotels, hospitals, etc. as they are also known to be locations where an individual can remain for 24 hours. Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest land use where an individual could remain for 24 hours to the Project property (in this case the nearest residential land use at a distance of 1,268 feet) has been used to determine construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PMlo and PM2.5, since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time. Non -Residential Receptors: As per the LST Methodology, commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor because employees and patrons do not typically remain onsite for a full 24 hours but are typically onsite for eight hours or less. The LST Methodology explicitly states that "LSTs based on shorter averaging periods, such as the NO2 and CO LSTs, could also be applied to receptors such as industrial or commercial facilities since it is reasonable to assume that a worker at these sites could be present for periods of one to eight hours." For purposes of analysis, if an industrial/commercial use is located at a closer distance to the Project property than the nearest residential use, the nearest industrial/commercial use has been utilized to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for emissions of NO2 and CO an individual could be present at these sites for periods of one to eight hours. Localized air quality impacts were evaluated at sensitive receptor land uses nearest the Project property. Consistent with the Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., all distances are measured from the Project property boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., backyards) or at the building fagade, whichever is closer to the Project property. The selection of receptor locations is based on Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines and is consistent with additional guidance provided by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-29 October 2022 267 4.3 AIR QUALITY R1: Located approximately 4,517 feet north of the Project property, R1 represents existing residential homes on Quarry Ranch Road. R2: Location R2 represents existing residential homes located approximately 6,872 feet north of the Project property on Avenue 58. R3: Location R3 represents the existing residential homes located roughly 6,951 feet northeast of the Project property at the southeast corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58. R4: Location R4 represents the existing residential homes located roughly 2,178 feet northeast of the Project property. R5: Location R5 represents the existing residential community east of the Project property at roughly 1,268 feet. Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-30 October 2022 268 040MYrAGE L: �p -E Q0Pik :9 lk W-w"Jq wi lk WHAVe flVFNVf . A- 4 n 0M-Avi eta 71�1 Fff-11 )E 4C M M'.JIL X7JKJff -M. w W'M.M M A: b In M 5AMa . '- m' pnrrrEc {ACTU5YD 0ATPALA PR 6 d— -io IF Z' �' TAVE ■ U Site P P A d LEGEND. — Exirling 6. Pont High B;i rrier Recepto, La rati ons M Existing 20 Folt i-14h Be rrTr • D!-Stafl" from receptor to Project site boundary I in feet) Source: Air Quality Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc. P45A.-CON SU LTI N G, I CSC - SENSITIVE RECEPTOR LOCATIONS i, L 1 F J r 4 1 M C a -- M F 14 Ci N IFF A: ! 4 Q - m 1. i. '.'14 f.. TRAVERTINE EXHIB1413-1 4.3 AIR QUALITY The nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 is represented by location R5 which is an existing residential community located east of the Project property at approximately 1,268 feet/386 meters. As such, the 386-meter distance will be used for evaluation of localized PM10 and PM2.5 emission impacts. As previously stated, and consistent with LST Methodology, the nearest industrial/commercial use to the Project property is used to determine construction and operational LST air impacts for emissions of NOx and CO as the averaging periods for these pollutants are shorter (8 hours or less) and it is reasonable to assumed that an individual could be present at these sites for periods of one to 8 hours. There are no industrial/commercial receptors closer than the residential community located at R5. As such, the 386- meter distance will be used for evaluation of localized NO2, and CO. Project -related Receptors Relative to On -Site Construction Activities Due to the phased nature of the Project development, future phases have the potential to generate construction impacts to previous phases of development. Phase 2 building construction activities will impact the on -site receptors planned in Phase 1. To assess the potential Phase 2 building construction activity and consistent with prescribed methods, a 25-meter distance will be used for evaluation of localized PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and CO. Similarly, Phase 3 building construction activities will impact the on -site receptors planned in Phases 1 and 2. To assess the potential Phase 3 building construction activity, a 25-meter distance was also used for evaluation of localized PM1o, PM2.5, NO2, and CO. Construction -Source Emissions LST Analysis Localized Thresholds for Construction Activity: It should be noted that since the look -up tables identify thresholds at only 1 acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres, linear regression has been utilized to determine localized significance thresholds. Localized Construction -Source Emissions Tables 4.3-8 identifies the localized impacts at the nearest receptor location in the vicinity of the Project area. Without mitigation, localized construction emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for emissions of any criteria pollutant during the full range of Project construction activities. Given that the estimated emission levels for all Project activities are below the applicable thresholds, the implementation of off -site construction activities taking place at the utility fields and off -site locations of street improvements is similarly not expected to result in localized emission exceedances. All on- and off -site construction activities will be subject to the City's fugitive dust control standards, which further ensures that LST impacts associated with particulate matter will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-32 October 2022 270 4.3 AIR QUALITY Table 4.3-8 Localized Construction Emissions Summary (Unmitigated) Construction Phase Localized Threshold Exceeded? NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 Phase A Grading Activities (Crushing, Madison Avenue with Water Line, Grading & Tank Construction, Avenue 62 with Water Line, Well Construction, Substation Construction) NO NO NO NO Phase B Grading Activities NO NO NO NO Phase 1 NO NO NO NO Phase 2 NO NO NO NO Phase 3 NO NO NO NO Note: Refer to Table 3-8 (Localized Construction Emissions Summary (Unmitigated)) in the AQIA for a detailed table. Operational -Source Emissions LST Analysis According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed Project if the Project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse buildings). The proposed Project does not include uses that could generate significant stationary source emissions; therefore, no long- term localized significance threshold analysis is required. The above noted analysis demonstrates that the LST thresholds are not expected to be exceeded during construction with the implementation of mitigation measures. No long-term localized significance threshold analysis is required because the proposed land uses do not include major stationary sources of air pollution. Therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors will be less than significant. d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? The potential for the Project to generate other potentially hazardous or noxious emissions or objectionable odors has also been considered. Land uses generally associated with odor or other noxious emission complaints include: • Agricultural uses (livestock and farming) • Wastewater treatment plants • Lakes, ponds other surface storage facilities • Food processing plants • Chemical plants • Composting operations • Refineries • Landfills • Dairies • Fiberglass molding facilities Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-33 October 2022 271 4.3 AIR QUALITY The Project does not contain nor is located in proximity to land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors or other noxious emissions. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities, and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) or surface water management associated with the proposed Project's (long-term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction. Therefore, potential impacts associated with construction -related odor and other noxious emissions will be less than significant. Potential operational emissions of or exposures to sources of odor or noxious emissions are also expected to be less than significant. Commercial and residential refuse will be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City's solid waste regulations. The proposed Project will also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. On -site water features are expected be maintained properly. Nearby groundwater recharge basins are designed to percolate water into the subsurface basin as quickly as possible and standing water is not an issue with these facilities. Therefore, odors or other noxious emissions associated with the proposed Project construction and operations will be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 4.3.5 Cumulative Impacts As previously discussed, the Coachella Valley region is designated as nonattainment for Ozone and P1V11o. The SCAQMD has published the White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution which addresses the cumulative impacts from air pollution. In this report the SCAQM D states: ':..the AQMD [Air Quality Management District] uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental Assessment or EIR. The only case where the significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts differ is the HI [Hazard Index] significance threshold for toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions. The project specific (project increment) significance threshold is HI > 1.0 while the cumulative (facility -wide) is HI > 3.0. It should be noted that the HI is only one of three TAC emission significance thresholds considered (when applicable) in a CEQA analysis. The other two are the maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) and the cancer burden, both of which use the same significance thresholds (MICR of 10 in 1 million and cancer burden of 0.5) for project specific and cumulative impacts. Projects that exceed the project -specific significance thresholds are considered by the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. This is the reason project -specific and cumulative Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-34 October 2022 272 4.3 AIR QUALITY significance thresholds are the some. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project - specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant." As discussed in the LST analysis above, the Project will not exceed project -specific thresholds. Therefore, this Specific Plan analysis assumes that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for project -specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project -related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project -specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. Construction Impacts The Project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that Project construction -related air pollutant emissions would result in exceedances of regional thresholds prior to implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Therefore, Project construction -source emissions would likewise be considered cumulatively considerable prior to implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Operational Impacts The Project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that Project operational air pollutant emissions would result in exceedances of regional thresholds for emissions of VOCs starting in Phase 2 through Phase 3. Operational emission levels would not be surpassed during Phase 1. The majority of VOC emissions are linked to mobile sources (vehicle trips) and consumer products based on quantitative estimates made from the current data and regulatory setting (e.g., emissions standards and consumer product regulations). The control of such sources is primarily linked to CARB regulations. Specifically, VOC emissions from mobile sources are attributed primarily to CARB's vehicle emissions standards, including the Low -Emission Vehicle Program, while consumer product VOC sources are regulated under CARB's Consumer Products Regulatory Program. CARB is continually reviewing and implementing strategies to lower vehicle emissions and reactivity of household products, such as cleaning supplies and aerosols. The Project is not precluded from being regulated or forming part of future statewide controls over these sources. However, until such measures are in place, the Project provides various measures to reduce VMTs via MM AQ-3 through AQ-5 and to comply with the best practices for reducing the presence of volatile organic compounds in applicable consumer products at the managed common facilities via MM AQ-6 through AQ-10. The Project incorporates Mitigation Measure MM AQ-2, prompting the applicant to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445 (Wood -Burning Devices) by prohibiting the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development. The purpose of this rule by SCAQMD is to reduce the emission of particulate matter Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-35 October 2022 273 4.3 AIR QUALITY from woodburning devices for the reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). MM AQ-2 would employ the available compliance measure to help reduce the contribution to VOCs and ozone but would not result in a numeric reduction capable of off -setting the various sources of VOCs associated with the Project. As such VOC emissions are considered significant and unavoidable even with implementation of feasible mitigation measure. 4.3.6 Mitigation Measures MM AQ-1 The General Contractor and all sub -contractors shall ensure that during Project and off -site utility construction activities, off -road diesel construction equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, complies with EPA/CARB Tier 4 off -road emissions standards or equivalent and shall ensure that all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. MM AQ-2 The Project applicant must comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 445 (Wood -Burning Devices), as amended, by explicitly prohibiting the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development. Mitigation Measures to Reduce VOCs from Mobile Sources: MM AQ-3 The Project operator shall provide and/or accommodate facilities within the Project property, such as bicycle parking and storage, to encourage bicycle use instead of driving as a method to reduce or otherwise eliminate certain vehicle trips within the Project area. MM AQ-4 The Project operator of the on -site resort facilities shall implement procedures to accommodate remote work or telecommuting, as applicable to the work sectors, as a method to reduce commercial vehicle miles traveled. MM AQ-5 The Project operator shall encourage the use of low emission vehicles to reduce the reliance on gasoline or diesel fuel by providing charging stations and designated parking for emissions free vehicles. Mitigation Measures to Reduce VOCs from Consumer Products: MM AQ-6 The Project operator shall utilize "Super -Compliant" or otherwise non -aerosol dispersal/application methods (and/or low VOC products) in all Commercial Buildings including the Hotel, Spa and Golf Training Facility. This includes but is not limited to: air fresheners, cooking spray, floor maintenance products, furniture maintenance products, degreaser, oven cleaners, toilet care products. Project operators can refer to the CARB Consumer Product Program web site for the most current information. MM AQ-7 The Project operator shall utilize low VOC products to the greatest degree possible on all landscape maintenance activities associated with the Commercial Buildings, Golf Training grounds and Common Landscape Areas. These shall be applied with non -aerosol measures Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-36 October 2022 274 4.3 AIR QUALITY where possible. Applicable products include insecticides, pesticides, pool/spa disinfectants, grill cleaners. Project operators can refer to the CARB Consumer Product Program web site for the most current information. MM AQ-8 The Project operator shall require all commercial products to be diluted as directed. MM AQ-9 The Project operator shall use low -solvent or solvent -free paints shall be used for all commercial buildings and common area monumentation or walls (including repairs.) MM AQ-10 The Project operator shall minimize the use of pesticides with high organic solvent contents, and/or the use of emulsions and water -based formulations. 4.3.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact during construction activities. Impacts related to operational activities would be less than significant during Phase 1, but would become potentially significant and unavoidable upon the implementation of Phase 2 through Phase 3 even with implementation of mitigation listed above. 4.3.8 References 1. Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board, February 2010; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book 2. Coachella Valley ExtremeArea Plan for19978-Hour Ozone Standard, Public Consultation Meeting Presentation by SCAQMD, September 25, 2020 3. Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard Fact Sheet, SCAQMD, September 2020 4. Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. 5. Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. 6. Draft Coachella Valley Extreme Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, by SCAQMD, September 2020. 7. Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003 8. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2017 9. Draft 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), December 2022 Travertine Draft EIR 4.3-37 October 2022 275 Page intentionally blank 276 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.4 Biological Resources 4.4 Biological Resources 4.4.1 Introduction Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Biological Technical Report for the Travertine Development Project prepared by Michael Baker International (March 2022), Biological Resources Assessment, the Project -specific Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (June 2021), Addendum to the Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (November 2021), Biological Utility Field Memo, Michael Baker International (July 2022), the City of La Quinta General Plan, the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan, Biological Opinion, US Fish and Wildlife Service (2005), and the Joint Project Review, Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (2020). This section establishes the environmental setting for purposes of Biological Resources, assesses the significance of impacts on these resources from the development associated with the Travertine Specific Plan, and proposes feasible mitigation measures to reduce and avoid potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. The Biological Technical Report, the Jurisdictional Delineation, the Joint Project Review, and additional memos are included in the Appendices to this Draft EIR (Appendix D.1, Biological Technical Report; Appendix D.2, Utility Field Biological Memo; Appendix D.3, Jurisdictional Delineation; Appendix D.4, Addendum to the Jurisdictional Delineation; Appendix D.5, Joint Project Review). 4.4.2 Existing Conditions Climate The City of La Quinta, and the surrounding region, is located in a hot, arid desert climate. The surrounding mountains block coastal influences, creating an area of low rainfall. The valley floor typically receives an average of four inches of rain per year. Temperatures frequently exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit during the summer and can occasionally fall below freezing during winter. Project Location The Travertine Specific Plan Amendment property covers an area of approximately 855 acres (the Project property), located north of the Martinez Rockslide, east of vacant land owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), south of Coral Mountain and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) lands, and west of Dike No. 4 and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) percolation ponds. Off -site impacts associated with road and Project improvements are expected to occur on an additional 114 acres. The Project property and off -site improvements associated with the Specific Plan Amendment comprise 969 acres. The development proposed as part of the Specific Plan Amendment, inclusive of master planned Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-1 October 2023 277 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES roadways, occurs on approximately 855 acres. Project development is proposed to permanently impact 553.14 acres and result in temporary impacts to approximately 123.6 acres of the Project site. This Draft EIR also includes a programmatic evaluation of the off -site utility field where water wells and an electric power substation are planned to support the Project. The exact locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located east of the Project site, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west. The off -site utility field has been identified in consultation with the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and the City. See Exhibits 3- 1, 3-2, 3-3 and 3-4 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR. The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) is located to the west, south, and southeast of the Project site. Physical Features The Travertine Specific Plan Project property is approximately 855 acres in size and is mainly comprised of undeveloped land and a historic vineyard including unimproved dirt roads. The topography of the site is generally flat with rolling hills and desert washes that include natural communities comprised of rocky soils. The site is surrounded by steep, rocky slopes to the south and west, with a small rocky outcropping to the north. Land uses surrounding the Project property to the south and west consist primarily of vacant land that transitions into the Martinez Rockslide to the south and the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and north. Vacant land under the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) management occurs along the western border and at the existing Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, with residential development occurring near the northeast border of the Project site beyond the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Dike No. 4. Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types Five (5) natural vegetation communities were observed and mapped within the boundaries of the Project site: Larrea tridentata Shrubland, Sonoran Mixed Woody and Succulent Scrub, Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland, Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and Ambrosia Salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland. In addition, the Project site contains five (5) land cover types classified as former agriculture, active agriculture, ornamental, disturbed/developed, and developed. The area of vegetation communities and land cover types identified within the Project site and the impacts proposed to each are presented in Table 4.4-1 below. Vegetation community acreages presented in this table include the 855-acre Project property and surrounding areas where road extensions and improvements performed as part of the Project site would occur, covering a total of 969 acres. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-2 October 2023 278 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Table 4.4-1 Summary of Vegetation/Land Use Types Vegetation Community/ Land Cover Types Acreage Total Within Project Site Proposed Impacts Permanent Temporary Larrea tridentata Shrubland 617.01 288.59 42.02 Sonoran Mixed Woody and Succulent Scrub 186.63 13.13 26.55 Parkinsonia florida - Olneya tesota Woodland 68.89 15.48 10.82 Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland 9.68 2.47 5.77 Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland 3.96 1.42 2.55 Ambrosia Salsola - Bebbia juncea Shrubland 20.96 7.92 13.04 Former Agriculture 224.71 215.94 8.70 Active Agriculture 6.56 0.47 6.09 Ornamental 4.52 0.05 4.47 Disturbed/Developed 6.83 3.61 1.76 Developed 5.89 1 4.06 1 1.83 Total 969.1 553.14 123.6 Source: Biological Resources Assessment Michael Baker International, Table 2 Native Vegetation Communities This category includes vegetation communities dominated by plant species native to California. Larrea Tridentata Shrubland Approximately 617.01 acres of Larrea tridentate Shrubland is located generally along the northern portions of the Project site. Creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) is the dominant species providing a majority of the vegetative cover in this alliance. Additional species present include burrow weed (Ambrosia dumosa), cheesebrush (Ambrosia salsola), branched pencil cholla (Cylin drop un tia ramossissima), California barrel cactus (Ferocactus cylindraceus), catclaw (Senegalia greggii), Yuma sandmat (Euphorbia setiloba), wand holdback (Hoffmannseggia microphyllo), and brittlebush (Encelia farinoso). Parkinsonia Florida - Olneya Tesota Woodland Approximately 68.89 acres of Parkinsona Florida - Olneya tesota Woodlands is located throughout the Project site in areas associated with drainages or within areas of discontinuous sheet flow. Predominant vegetation covers consist of blue paloverde (Parkinsona spinosus) trees ranging 10 to 20 feet in height and crown diameter, with smaller quantities of catclaw, smoke tree (Psorothommus spinosus), jojoba (Simmondsio chinensis), and desert lavender (Condea emoryi) intermixed. Parkinsona Florida - Olneya tesota Woodland is not formally listed as a California Sensitive Natural Community by CFDW; however, the Parkinsonia florida Association under this Alliance is currently listed Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-3 October 2023 279 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES as a California Sensitive Natural Community (CDFW 2021). Impacts to sensitive natural communities are addressed in this analysis. Atriplex Polycarpa Shrubland Approximately 9.68 acres of Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland is located along the northeastern portion of the Project site and is dominated by allscale saltbush (Atriplex polycarpa). Additional species in lesser quantities observed in this community include blue paloverde trees, cheesebrush, and creosote bush. In addition, salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima) is present along the northern perimeter of this community that experiences periods of discontinuous sheet flow during storm events. Disturbed Atriplex Polycarpa Shrubland Approximately 3.96 acres of disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland is located in two areas within the northeastern and eastern portions of the Project site. These areas are composed of graded slopes, dirt roads, and levee construction and consist of bare, disturbed soils sparsely vegetated with allscale saltbush. Additional species observed within this community include occasional creosote bush and dyebush (Psorothamnus emoryi) shrubs. Ambrosia Salsola — Bebbia Juncea Shrubland Approximately 20.96 acres of Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland is located along two areas within the northern portion of the Project site. These areas are dominated by sweetbush (Bebbia juncea) with lower quantities of creosote bush and burrow weed. Land Cover Types This category includes non -vegetated or sparsely vegetated areas with species generally not native to California. Former Agriculture Approximately 224.71 acres of land formerly used for agriculture are generally located within the central portion of the Project site. This land cover type consists of compacted dirt roads surrounding plots of former vineyards, currently composed of disturbed soils and abandoned structures used for agriculture operations. Revegetation by native species has occurred since vineyard operations have ceased, primarily by blue paloverde trees which comprise approximately one (1) to two (2) percent of absolute cover. Additional native species present in small quantities include fanleaf crinklemat (Tiquilia plicata), small datura (Datura discolor), cheesebrush, creosote bush, climbing milkweed (Funastrum cynanchoides var. hartwegii), sweetbush, allscale saltbush, coyote gourd (Cucurbita palmata), white - stemmed milkweed (Asclepius albicans), and desert pine (Peucephyllum schottii). Non-native species Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-4 October 2023 280 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES observed across the former agricultural lands include saltcedar (Tamarixramosissima) and orange wattle (Acacia saligna). Active Agriculture Approximately 6.56 acres of active agriculture is located along the eastern portion of the Project site. This land cover type currently consists of disturbed, bare soils utilized for agriculture bordered by ornamental plantings that function as windbreaks. These ornamental plantings consist of tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), oleander (Nerium oleander), and Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis). Ornamental Approximately 4.52 acres of ornamental landscaping associated with a golf course occurs along the eastern portion of the Project site. Ornamental vegetation consists of non-native Jerusalem thorn (Parkinsonia aculeata) and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) trees intermixed with native big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis) shrubs. Disturbed/Developed Approximately 6.83 acres of disturbed/developed land are located throughout the Project site and consist primarily of compacted bare ground along paved roadways sparsely vegetated with non-native and native ruderal species, including cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), and Spanish needles (Palafoxia arida). Developed Developed areas consisting of paved roadways and a water tank storage facility comprise approximately 5.89 acres of the Project site. These areas have been physically altered to a degree that native vegetation is no longer supported. Natural vegetation communities provide foraging habitat, nesting/denning sites, and shelter from adverse weather or predation. This section provides a general discussion of those wildlife species that were observed during the field surveys or that are expected to occur based on existing site conditions. The discussion is to be used as a general reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather conditions in which the field surveys were conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-5 October 2023 281 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Fish No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) with frequent sources of water that would be sufficient to support populations of fish were observed in the Project site during the field survey. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur within the Project site. Amphibians No amphibians or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would provide suitable breeding habitat for amphibians were observed within the Project site during the field survey. Therefore, no amphibians are expected to occur within the Project site. Reptiles Western side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans), southern desert horned lizard (Phrynosoma platyrhinos calidiarum), and western zebra -tailed lizard (Callisaurus draconoides rhodostictus) were the only species of reptiles observed during the field surveys. Habitat within the Project site is also suitable for a number of other common reptilian species known from the region, such as northern desert iguana (Dipsosaurus dorsolis dorsalis), Great Basin whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris tigris), and red racer (Coluber flagellum piceus). Birds Common bird species that were observed within or adjacent to the Project site included blue -grey gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), violet - green swallow (Tachycineta thalassina), black -throated sparrow (Amphispiza bilineata), Costa's hummingbird (Calypte costae), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common raven (Corvus corax), and red -railed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). In addition, four (4) special -status bird species were observed within or adjacent to the Project site during the field surveys: black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura; State Watch List [WL] species), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus; State Species of Special Concern [SSC]), long-eared owl (Asio otus; State SSC), and osprey (Pandion haliaetus; State WL species). Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 and the California Fish and Game Code3 (CFGC). No active bird nests or birds displaying nesting behaviors were observed within the Project site during the field surveys. However, the Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland, Larrea tridentata Shrubland, Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and ornamental vegetation communities within the Project site provide suitable nesting opportunities for a variety of resident and migratory bird species, including those birds that nest on open ground or within cacti (e.g., burrowing owl, cactus wren [Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus]). Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-6 October 2023 282 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mammals The Project site has the potential to support a variety of mammalian species; however, most mammalian species in the region are nocturnal and are difficult to observe during a diurnal habitat assessment. Blacktailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) and white-tailed antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus leucurus) were the only species directly observed during the field surveys. Coyote (Canis latrans), domestic dog (Canis lupis familiaris), and horse (Equus sp.) tracks/sign were observed within the Project site. There is no suitable roosting habitat for bat species (Order Chiroptera) within the Project site, due to a lack of hollow trees, mines, caves, rock outcrops, deep rock crevices, and man-made structures (i.e., bridges, tunnels, and buildings) which may provide suitable bat roosting habitat. Although there are palm trees in the surrounding residential and commercial landscape, they are frequently trimmed and maintained, reducing their value as bat roosting habitat compared to palm trees that are unmaintained and retain dead palm fronds. Additionally, rock outcrops and deep rock crevices more suitable for bat roosting are likely present in the surrounding mountain landscape. However, because of the open vegetation landscape, the Project site does have the potential to provide suitable foraging habitat for various species of bats. Migratory Corridors and Linkages Wildlife corridors and linkages are key features for wildlife movement between habitat patches. Wildlife corridors are generally defined as those areas that provide opportunities for individuals or local populations to conduct seasonal migrations, permanent dispersals, or daily commutes, while linkages generally refer to broader areas that provide movement opportunities for multiple keystone/focal species or allow for propagation of ecological processes (e.g., for movement of pollinators), often between areas of conserved land. Residential uses/urban areas adjoin the Project site to the west. Wildlife movement, especially Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (PBS), potentially occurs within this open conservation area adjacent to the Project site. Areas to the east and north of the Project site primarily consist of residential and commercial land uses, while some land to the west/northwest consists of BLM land. Any wildlife currently utilizing the Project site and adjacent areas for dispersal and movement are likely adapted to disturbances associated with urban environments. Project activities are not expected to significantly impede wildlife movement through the area, as the Project site does not coincide with or function as a significant wildlife movement corridor. Open conservation areas to the south and west would continue to provide opportunities for local wildlife movement and function as a corridor for highly mobile wildlife species. Onsite Soils On -site surface elevation ranges from approximately -80 to 425 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and generally slopes to the east. Most of the Project site is generally flat with rolling hills and desert washes that encompasses natural communities comprised of rocky soils. According to the Custom Soil Resource Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-7 October 2023 283 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Report for Anza-Borrego Area, California and Riverside County, Coachella Valley Area, California (USDA 2022), the Project site is underlain by the following soil units: Carrizo stony sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes (CcQ Carsitas gravelly sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (CdC); Carsitas cobbly sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes (ChQ Gilman fine sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (GbB); Indio fine sandy loam (Ip); Indio fine sandy loam, wet (Ir); Myoma fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (MaB); rock outcrop (RO); rubble land (RU). Exhibit 4.4-1, USDA Soils, depicts the soil units within the Project site. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-8 October 2023 284 33.612921 -116.272715AN SEE INSET MAP 33.584164 -116.249242 Legend Project Site (969.02 acres) CcC Carrizo stony sand, GbB Gilman fine sandy loam, RO Rock outcrop ® Reference Point 2 to 9 percent slopes 2 to 5 percent slopes RU Rubble land ChC Carsitas cobbly sand, GaB Gilman loamy fine sand, M oma fine sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes 0 to 5 percent slopes la Water MaB 0 to 5 percent slopes CdC Carsitas gravelly sand, M Indio fine sandy loam NOTCOM No Digital Data Available 0 to 9 percent slopes SACON .i LT I I I I I O 0 400 800 t r, r`.?41.11ti,•- }•r;,„ -tr.::ll-:--., - ' .•I' - rt Feet Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), USDA (2019) USDA SOILS TRAVERTINE €HIBIT 4.4-1 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Special -Status Biological Resources Special Status Plant Species Thirty-six (36) special -status plant species have been recorded within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5-minute quadrangles. Based on the results of the literature review and field surveys, the following plant species were determined to have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Project site: California ayenia (Ayenia compacta), and glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis claryana). These species are not listed as candidate, threatened or endangered species by CDFW and USFWS. However, they are considered rare in California, but more common elsewhere. All other special -status plant species are not listed or rare, and either have a low potential to occur or are not expected within the Project site based on existing site conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions. California barrel cactus (Ferocactus cylindraceus), Gander's buckhorn cholla (Cylindropuntia ganderi), Englemann's hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus engelmannii), cottontop cactus (Echinocactus polycephalus), beavertail cactus (Opuntia basilaris), branched pencil cholla (Cylindropuntia ramossissima), ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens), catclaw (Acacia greggii), blue paloverde (Parkinsonia florida), and smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus) were observed throughout the Project site and are regulated under the California Desert Native Plants Act (CDNPA). Pursuant to the CDNPA, these species may not be dug up, mutilated, destroyed or harvested except with the permission of the landowner and under a permit issued by the Agriculture Commissioner of the County of Riverside. Special -Status Vegetation Communities There were no special -status vegetation communities tracked in the CNDDB observed within the Project area. The Blue palo verde-ironwood woodland (Parkinsonia florida Alliance) vegetation community is currently listed as a California Sensitive Natural Community (CDFW 2021) and was observed on 68.89 acre of the Project site. Special Status Wildlife Species Twenty-seven (27) special -status wildlife species have been recorded within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5-minute quadrangles. Based on Michael Baker's literature review and results of the field surveys, the following special -status wildlife species were determined to either be present or have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Project site: black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), long-eared owl (Asia otus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; State WL species), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus; State WL species), Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei; State SSC), and PBS (Ovis canadensis nelsoni). All other special -status wildlife species identified during the literature review either Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-10 October 2023 286 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES have a low potential to occur or are not expected within the Project site based on existing site conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions. Black -tailed gnatcatcher The black -tailed gnatcatcher was observed on the Project site during field surveys. This species was previously designated as a "Species of Special Concern" (SSC) by the CDFW. However, it no longer merits this status and has now been moved to the CDFW "Watch List" (WL). The black -tailed gnatcatcher prefers nesting and foraging in densely lined arroyos and washes dominated by creosote bush and salt brush. The Project site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat. Loggerhead Shrike The loggerhead shrike is a yearlong resident of California and prefers open habitats with bare ground, scattered shrubs, and areas with or sparse herbaceous cover. The Project site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the loggerhead shrike. The bird was observed on the Project site during the field survey performed by Michael Baker (2021). The loggerhead shrike is designated as a "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFW. Long-eared owl The long-eared owl is identified by the CDFW as a "Species of Special Concern" and was observed within or adjacent to the Project site. Habitats and vegetation within and surrounding the Project site have the potential to support this species. Osprey The osprey is on the CDFW "Watch List" and was observed on the Project site. The Project site has habitat and vegetation to support the nesting of this species. Burrowing Owl The owl is designated by the CDFW as a "Species of Special Concern". The burrowing owl was not observed on the Project site during the field survey performed by Michael Baker (2022). However, the owl has moderate potential to occur on the Project site since there is suitable foraging habitat. The Project site provides marginal nesting habitat for this species due to the onsite soil conditions and minimal number of suitable burrows. Prairie Falcon The Prairie Falcon has a "Watch List" designation by the CDFW. It was not observed on the Project site during the field survey but does have a high probability of occurring on the Project site because of the Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-11 October 2023 287 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES suitable foraging habitat. The Project site does not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species, as this species prefers cliffs or bluffs for nest sites. LeConte's Thrasher The LeConte's Thrasher is a common yearlong resident in southern California. This species primarily occurs in open desert wash, desert scrub, alkali desert scrub, and desert succulent shrub habitats. The thrasher was not observed on the Project site and there have been no occurrence records for this species within five miles of the Project site. There is moderate potential for the species to occur on the Project site. Although the site provides foraging habitat there is only marginal nesting habitat. This species commonly nests in dense, spiny shrubs or densely branched cactus in desert wash habitat, usually 2-8 feet above ground. Peninsular Bighorn Sheep The PBS is listed as "Federally Endangered" by the USFWS. This species prefers the eastern slopes of the Peninsular ranges below 4,600 feet above mean sea level (asml). Optimal habitat includes steep walled canyons and ridges bisected by rocky or sandy washes, with available water. Alluvial fans and washes in flatter terrain are also used for foraging and water. The Project site does not include any USFWS-designated Critical Habitat; however, Critical Habitat for PBS is adjacent to the southern border of the Project site and within approximately 700 feet of the western Project property boundary. Under the Federal Endangered Species Act, areas of designated Critical Habitat may require special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether the species is still extant in the area. The PBS was not observed on the Project site during the 2022 field survey performed by Michael Baker. The sheep has a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. The native vegetation communities within the southern portions of the Project site provide suitable foraging habitat for this species, but the Project site is unlikely to be used for lambing. There have been recent occurrence records for this species within one mile of the Project site. CDFW has monitored PBS movement in the Santa Rosa and Santa Jacinto mountains since 2009 with GPS collars and direct observation. CDFW's GPS data documents current and historic sheep use of Coral Mountain, north of the Project site. CDFW research on sheep movement, based on GPS data and direct observation, shows a trend of ewes spending a greater portion of their time in low -elevation habitat particularly during the Iamb -rearing season. The temporal shift to lower elevations may be a response to long-term drought conditions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-12 October 2023 288 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Desert tortoise The desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is listed as a threatened species under federal and state law. The tortoise can be found in a wide variety of habitats, such as alluvial fans, desert washes, canyons and saltbrush plains. Most tortoises in the Mojave Desert are usually associated with creosote bush scrub and alluvial fans and bajadas. The Project site contains suitable habitat for this species. Initial field surveys were performed in 1993 and a focused desert tortoise survey was performed in 2003 and no live desert tortoise or diagnostic sign were found. More recently, a general biological survey/habitat assessment and vegetation mapping was performed by Glenn Lukos Associates spanning several dates ranging from late 2017 to late 2019, with the results of the surveys included in the BRT. Michael Baker performed a jurisdictional delineation in February 2021 and a general biological survey and vegetation mapping in February and March of 2022. No incidental observations of desert tortoise were made during the jurisdictional delineation, and results of general biological surveys indicated no desert tortoise or diagnostic sign of the species on -site. With these findings, the BOR and BLM, in consultation with USFWS, determined that the Project area historically supported low densities of desert tortoise, and more recently, desert tortoises are not present in the Project area. The nearest recent sign of desert tortoise was recorded 3.75 miles northwest of the Project site. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-13 October 2023 289 Coral 1 Mountain l •l r 1� ' L INSET MAP N�T*Ir� :��� 4 • r3 ' rr Project Site i • ! 4 1 • �r Not a Part Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility WIN 1P& -- '•L,: Legend Project Site (969.02 acres) Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Boundary ® Reference Point San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains Conservation Area f CONSERVATION f MSHCP I�03}-C'V1L E-740l )F-Era'Pa�• F—:,Ah ' 1J: kk#- 4I.. O Feet TRAVERTINL Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), CVMSHCP (2016) L + H I B IT 4 •4' 2 33T612921 -116.272715 \I Coral Mountain � ♦ Ir ♦♦` ♦ Ili ♦♦ II II ♦♦ II ♦----------♦_—♦ ii i ♦ 11 Legend INSET MAP i t 1 1 Ii 1 •� if— 1 � 1 1 � � I• II Not a Part � I • lil � I • IIk�I!!! I I I 1 I 1 I 1 Thomas Levy Groundwater I Replenishment Facility I I. I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 r I I I I I ,I lei 1 r ♦ 1 ♦ 1 1 �♦ 1 ♦ 1 ♦ I � I — — — — — — — — — — — ---- 11 Am 11 11 i/ c` 0 Project Site (969.02 acres) Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres) = Peninsular Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsons) ® Reference Point -- -- , Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres) I I I I SEEINSET MAP 33.584164 -116.249242 MSACOI LZ'I ! PEN: NSU R BIGHORN SHEEP CRITICAL HABITAT -%-1 NO } ;=' III. I. r4:.t r, `tfj, l !{: } --.Al d f.' � 0 400 F ���CY� ��T� l il � Feet EXHIBIT 4.d�� Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), USFWS (2022) HI BIT 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Jurisdictional Waters The Projects ite slopes gently from west to east and is subject to two types of drainage conditions: alluvial fan flow and incised drainage corridors along inactive fans. Existing drainages originate in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west. All potentially affected drainages are located behind and upslope of the USBR Dike No. 4. Jurisdictional Delineation State jurisdictional features observed within the Project site consisted of numerous ephemeral drainage features located within five drainage areas (Drainage Area A through Drainage Area E). Regional Board jurisdiction totaled approximately 90.96 acres of non -wetland waters of the State and 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdiction (jurisdictional streambed). In addition, the on -site Desert Dry Wash Woodland (DDWW) habitat is considered CDFW jurisdiction and totaled approximately 55.98 acres. Table 4.4-2 below provides a breakdown of total acreages of jurisdictional features within the Project site as they relate to each regulatory agency. Table 4.4-2 Summary of Aquatic Resources and Delineation Limits within the Project Site I I Jurisdi�U�a al E_irrrii� (myes) F61% 14'y �IW� Ixr�ioq�� 14r�ard C'F]I U7'HJJiai K 07�AFLI]II � �iJ� �iF71 ih'xtYt �il• Aura I i Q+C 1144 tdan� reasvlx'1%T* I Mt'Ilund ;II-Vumhed 6 L�'`aceI �1 #ors }'ti`rr w6c d 1'•pl� In:�•:�l _ �21 6)M b.21 0.00 �• �? i��ri1� �,5� r.� C Quo #�x�l: 0 kitwj4t ' D UW 26M 23,29, Fplr�onY;7] Flci '�'rma 1: LI 60 1 ��rca�ra 96 5 . The majority of the Project site drainage features are characterized as desert dry wash and encompass multiple alluvial fans, which originate from multiple canyons of the Santa Rosa Mountains located to the west and south. The ephemeral drainage features generally display a sinuous form comprised of single and/or braided active channels. Generally, the active channels exhibited a very flat bed topography with high width to depth ratios. The identified ephemeral drainage features exhibited clear evidence of hydrology and are generally characterized by the great variability in rainfall and runoff volumes typical Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-16 October 2023 292 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES of the arid desert region. However, typical of desert dry wash systems and alluvial fans, segments of discontinuous sheet flow occur as flows become insignificant or lack channel confinement. As documented in the Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters and subsequent Addendum Letter (Michael Baker 2021), five (5) drainage features were documented within the boundaries of the Project site (Drainage Area A through Drainage Area E, see Exhibit 4.4-4, Drainage Areas), which is composed of approximately 90.96 acres. Refer to Appendix D.3 for the jurisdictional features documented within the Project site. All on -site aquatic features, comprising Drainage Areas A — E, demonstrate the presence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) as indicated by the presence of the following indicators: a clear, natural line impressed on the bank; changes in the character of soil; shelving; vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; sediment deposition; presence of wrack line; and scour. However, based on the detailed analysis of on -site hydrologic conditions, it was preliminarily determined that the relevant reaches have an insubstantial or speculative effect on the chemical, physical or biological significant nexus to the downstream to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel/Whitewater River and the Salton Sea, which are Traditional Navigable Waters (TNW) (Salton Sea). Surface flows from the Drainage Areas A — E, described further below, are directed towards the eastern portion of the Project site due to the presence of multiple dikes throughout and around the Project site including Guadalupe Dike and Training Dike in the northwest, and Dike No. 4 and a large levee along the Project site's eastern boundary. A 48-inch culvert and riser are located in the southeastern portion adjoining the Project site and the outlet serves as the only flood conveyance facility for flows to continue downstream and off -site. The outlet is sized for the Standard Project Flood; however, it would take nearly a 50-year storm to produce outlet flows. Flows are then conveyed through the Avenue 64 Evacuation Channel into the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC), which runs along the natural alignment of the Whitewater River and cuts diagonally across the valley until it reaches La Quinta. The discharge of the Avenue 64 Channel to the CVSC is insignificant as the peak flows of the channel do not impact the peak flows of the CVSC. Based on the information available, the elevation of the inlet is approximately - 2.0 MSL (NAVD88). This is about 8 feet above the low elevations behind the dike. Storm flows from a 100-year event (base flood) would not result in water surface elevations capable of reaching the outlet facility located approximately 8-feet above grade. Therefore, as none of the on -site drainage areas exhibit any significant connections to a TNW of the U.S., there is no Corps jurisdiction associated with the Project. As described in the Project's Delineation Report, no areas on -site exhibited all three wetland parameters. Therefore, no Corps jurisdictional wetlands are present on the Project site. However, the on -site features are waters of the State and under Regional Board jurisdiction for Drainage Areas A - E. Drainage Area A is located within the northern portion of the Project site to the north of the historic vineyard. Drainage Area A is comprised of an alluvial fan with multiple earthen ephemeral drainage Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-17 October 2023 293 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES features which convey surface flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains and surrounding land. Two dikes comprised of boulders and cobble extend west from the mountain in the northeast portion of the Project site. These dikes redirect the ephemeral drainage features east and prevent additional flows from migrating south toward the historic vineyard. The ephemeral drainage features converge at the base of the mountain and are diverted north through two confined waterfalls or northeast around the southern base of the mountain and continue offsite. Within Drainage Area A, many of the active channels were generally devoid of vegetation although sparse occurrences of paloverde, catclaw, and smoke tree occur in association with ephemeral drainage feature adjoining the historic vineyard to the north as well as within the two dikes to the north. As noted above, there are no waters of the U.S. within Drainage A. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-18 October 2023 294 295 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Drainage Area B is located within the northeastern portion of the Project site to the east of the historic vineyard and Drainage Area A. Drainage Area B is comprised of multiple earthen ephemeral drainage features, which convey surface flows from the surrounding land east toward Dike No. 4. Although no surface water was observed, the mapped drainage features exhibited clear evidence of hydrology and an OHWM was observed via the following indicators: scour, a break in bank slope, presence of litter and debris, sediment sorting and deposition, cobble bars behind obstructions, and a change in vegetation community (from no terrestrial vegetation in the active channel to upland shrubs outside the active channel). Segments of discontinuous sheet flow occur throughout Drainage Area B as flows become insignificant or lack channel confinement. The active channels within Drainage Area B were generally devoid of vegetation although sparse occurrences of paloverde and catclaw were identified. Upland vegetation outside the active channels consisted of upland species typical of the surrounding area including creosote bush, rubber rabbitbrush, burrobush, brittlebush, and fourwing saltbush. Drainage Area C is located within the southern portion of the Project site to the south of the historic vineyard. Drainage Area C is comprised of multiple alluvial fans with many earthen ephemeral drainage features, which convey surface flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains and surrounding land. Although no surface water was observed, the mapped drainage features exhibited clear evidence of hydrology and an OHWM. The active channels within Drainage Area C were generally devoid of vegetation although sparse occurrences of paloverde and catclaw were identified. Upland vegetation outside the active channels consisted of upland species typical of the surrounding area including creosote bush, rubber rabbitbrush, burrobush, brittlebush, and fourwing saltbush. In addition, ocotillo, branched pencil cholla, and California barrel cactus were distributed throughout upland areas located on high terraces well beyond the alluvial floodplain. As noted above, this drainage area does not have any waters of the U.S. but does include State jurisdictional waters. Drainage Area D is located within the southern portion of the Project site to the south of the historic vineyard and adjacent (east) to Drainage Area C. Drainage Area D is comprised of numerous braided channels located on an alluvial floodplain which convey surface flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains and surrounding land in a general southwest to east direction toward Dike No. 4 and offsite. The active channels generally consist of an earthen substrate comprised of coarse sand, gravel, and cobble. Although no surface water was observed during the field surveys, the mapped drainage features exhibited clear evidence of hydrology and an OHWM was identified. The active channels within Drainage Area D were generally devoid of vegetation although sparse occurrences of paloverde, smoke tree, and catclaw were identified. Upland vegetation outside the active channels includes cholla and California barrel cactus, which were distributed throughout upland areas located on high terraces well beyond the alluvial floodplain. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-20 October 2023 296 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Drainage Area E is located within the southeastern portion of the Project site to the south of Drainage Area D. Drainage Area E is comprised of multiple active channels which convey surface flows originating from the Martinez Rockslide east through the Project site toward Dike No. 4 and offsite. The active channels generally consist of an earthen substrate comprised of coarse sand, cobble, and rock. No surface water was observed. However, the mapped drainage features exhibited clear evidence of hydrology and an OHWM was identified. The active channels within Drainage Area E contained sparse occurrences of paloverde, smoke tree, catclaw, and desert lavender (Hyptis emoryi). Upland vegetation outside the active channels consisted of upland species typical of the Project site including, ocotillo, branched pencil cholla, and California barrel cactus which were distributed throughout upland areas located on high terraces well beyond the alluvial floodplain. 4.4.3 Regulatory Setting Federal, State, and local law, regulations, and plans pertaining to biological resources are discussed below. Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA or FESA) of 1973 provides a program for the conservation and protection of endangered and threatened plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. Section 7 of the ESA directs federal agencies to use their legal authorities to carry out conservation programs for listed species. It also requires these agencies to ensure that any actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the survival of any endangered or threatened species, or to destroy or adversely modify its designated critical habitat, if any. Additional protection is authorized by Section 9 of the ESA, which makes it illegal to take, import, export, or engage in interstate or international commerce in listed animals except by permit for certain conservation purposes. "Take" is defined by the ESA as to harm, harass, wound, trap, collect, kill or the attempt to engage in such activity. Section 10 Section 10 of the ESA allows an individual or private citizen to "take" a listed species if they develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). HCPs under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA provide for partnerships with non-federal parties to conserve the ecosystems upon which listed species depend, ultimately contributing to their recovery. HCPs are planning documents required as part of an application for a Section 10 incidental take permit. They describe the anticipated effects of the proposed taking; how those impacts will be minimized or Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-21 October 2023 297 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES mitigated; and how the HCP is to be funded. HCPs can apply to both listed and non -listed species, including those that are candidates or have been proposed for listing. Conserving species before they are in danger of extinction or are likely to become so can also provide early benefits and prevent the need for listing. The Federal Migratory Bird Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-712) (MBTA) implements four international conservation treaties that the U.S. entered into with Canada in 1916, Mexico in 1936, Japan in 1972, and Russia in 1976. It is intended to ensure the sustainability of populations of all protected migratory bird species. The law has been amended with the signing of each treaty, as well as when any of the treaties were amended, such as with Mexico in 1976 and Canada in 1995. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA), enacted in 1972, regulates discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) share jurisdiction for administering the Clean Water Act and are collectively responsible for adopting regulations for implementing the Clean Water Act. Under the CWA, the EPA has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industries. The EPA has also developed national water quality criteria recommendations for pollutants in surface waters. It is unlawful under the CWA to discharge any pollutant from a point source, which is a discrete conveyance such as pipes or man-made ditches, into navigable waters unless a permit is obtained. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Industrial, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters. Compliance monitoring under the NPDES Program encompasses a range of techniques in order to address the most significant problems and to promote compliance among the regulated community. Wetland Definition Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act The term "wetlands" (a subset of "waters of the United States") is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(b) as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support... a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." In 1987 the USACE published the Wetland Manual to guide its field personnel in determining jurisdictional wetland boundaries. The methodology set forth in the Wetland Manual and the Arid West Supplement generally require that, in order to be considered a wetland, the vegetation, soils, and hydrology of an Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-22 October 2023 298 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES area exhibit at least minimal hydric characteristics. While the Wetland Manual and Arid West Supplement provide great detail in methodology and allow for varying special conditions, a wetland should normally meet each of the following three criteria: • More than 50 percent of the dominant plant species at the site must be typical of wetlands (i.e., rated as facultative or wetter in the Arid West 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List); • Soils must exhibit physical and/or chemical characteristics indicative of permanent or periodic saturation (e.g., a gleyed color, or mottles with a matrix of low chroma indicating a relatively consistent fluctuation between aerobic and anaerobic conditions); and • Whereas the Wetland Manual requires that hydrologic characteristics indicate that the ground is saturated to within 12 inches of the surface for at least five percent of the growing season during a normal rainfall year, the Arid West Supplement does not include a quantitative criteria with the exception for areas with "problematic hydrophytic vegetation", which require a minimum of 14 days of ponding to be considered a wetland. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the USACE regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States (WOTUS), including wetland and non -wetland aquatic features. Jurisdictional waters of the United States are by the 1986/1988 regulatory definition of WOTUS under CWA regulations 40 CFR 230.3(s). Section 404 is founded on the findings of a significant nexus (or connection) between the aquatic or other hydrological feature in question and interstate commerce via Relatively Permanent Waters (RPW), and ultimately Traditional Navigable Waters (TNW), through direct or indirect connection as defined by Corps regulations. However, the limits to which this is applied have changed over time as discussed subsequently. SWANCC and Rapanos In 1984, the Migratory Bird Rule enabled the Corps to expand jurisdiction over isolated waters, and in 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the inclusion of adjacent wetlands in the regulatory definition of WOTUS. However, in 2001, the jurisdiction of USACE was narrowly limited following the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the use of "isolated" non -navigable intrastate ponds by migratory birds was not, by itself, sufficient basis for the exercise of Federal regulatory authority under the CWA. In 2006, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court overturned two Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decisions in the consolidated cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States (collectively referred to as Rapanos), concluding that wetlands isolated by surface connection are WOTUS nonetheless if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters (significant nexus). Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-23 October 2023 299 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 2015 Clean Water Rule In 2015, the USACE and EPA published the "Clean Water Rule" clarifying the scope of coverage of the CWA. Upon issuance however, numerous lawsuits were filed and consolidated in the Sixth Circuit, immediately putting a "stay" on its implementation. In January 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court dissolved the stay. The 2015 Clean Water Rule remained in effect in 22 states, including California, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories until the December 23, 2019. Repeal of 2015 Clean Water Rule On October 22, 2019, the EPA and the USACE published a final rule to repeal the 2015 Clean Water Rule and restore the regulatory methodology that existed prior to the 2015 Rule. Under this rule, which became effective on December 23, 2019, jurisdictional WOTUS were defined by the 1986/1988 regulatory definition of WOTUS under CWA regulations 40 CFR 230.3(s). Navigable Waters Protection Rule On January 23, 2020, the EPA and the Corps finalized the NWPR to define WOTUS. On April 21, 2020, the EPA and the USACE published the NWPR in the Federal Register. On June 22, 2020, 60 days after publication in the Federal Register, the NWPR became effective across the nation including the State of California. The NWPR eliminated the case specific application of the significant nexus test articulated in the Rapanos decision. Jurisdictional features were discussed in the June 2021 Delineation Report based on the methodologies associated with the NWPR. Remand and Vacatur of the Navigable Waters Protection Rule On August 30, 2021, the NWPR was remanded and immediately vacated by the United States District Court for the District Of Arizona in the case of Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In light of this order, the EPA and the USACE halted implementation of the NWPR nationwide and reinstated the pre-2015 definition of WOTUS. Under the pre-2015 definition of the WOTUS, the USACE and EPA require the case specific application of the significant nexus test, as articulated in the Rapanos decision, to determine WOTUS. Currently, the pre-2015 regulations apply per notice from the USACE and EPA. At the same time, those agencies are still working on a rulemaking (announced on June 9, 2021) to repeal and replace the Navigable Waters Protection Rule with a new rule to define WOTUS. See below for an analysis of Project site conditions using the pre-2015 definitions of WOTUS. State Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-24 October 2023 300 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) enacted in 1970 and subsequently amended, conserves and protects plant and animal species at risk of extinction. CESA also addresses the taking of threatened, endangered, or candidate species by stating "no person shall import into the state, export out of the state, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within this state, any species, or any part or product thereof, that the commission determines to be an endangered species or a threatened species, or attempt any of those acts, except as otherwise provided." Endangered Species CESA defines an endangered species as "a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change of habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease." Threatened Species The State defines threatened species as "a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required by this chapter. Any animal determined by the commission as rare on or before January 1, 1985 is a threatened species." Candidate Species Candidate species are defined as "a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the commission has formally noticed as being under review by the department for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list." Candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already listed as threatened or endangered at the discretion of the Fish and Game Commission. Unlike the FESA, CESA does not list invertebrate species. CDFW has the responsibility for maintaining a list of threatened and endangered species (California Fish and Game Code Section 2070). CDFW also maintains a list of "candidate species," which are species formally noticed as being under review for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species. In addition, CDFW maintains lists of "species of special concern," which serve as "watch lists." Pursuant to the requirements of the CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed Project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state -listed endangered or threatened species could be present on the Project site and determine whether the proposed Project could have a potentially Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-25 October 2023 301 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES significant impact on such species. In addition, CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed Project that may affect a candidate species. Take Prohibition and Authorization Section 2080 of the California Fish and Game Code provides that no person or public agency shall import into this State, export out of this state, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within this State, any species, or any part or product thereof .... [determined] to be an endangered species or a threatened species, or attempt any of those acts, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the Native Plant Protection Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 1900) of this code), or the California Desert Native Plants Act (Division 23 (commencing with Section 80001) of the Food and Agricultural Code). CDFW may, pursuant to section 2081(b), authorize incidental take of endangered, threatened and candidate species. In certain circumstances, Section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code allows CDFW to adopt the federal incidental take statement or the 10 (a) permit as its own based on its findings that the federal permit adequately protects the species under state law. California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species Under Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511 of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), it is unlawful to take, possess or cause destruction of birds, nests, and eggs. Fully protected birds may not be taken or possessed without a specific permit. Section 3505.3 protects all birds of prey and their eggs and nests against take, possession, or destruction of nests or eggs. California Desert Native Plants Act (CDNPA) The purpose of the CDNPA is to protect certain species of California desert native plants from unlawful harvesting on both public and privately owned lands. The CDNPA only applies within the boundaries of Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. Within these counties, the CDNPA prohibits the harvest, transport, sale, or possession of specific native desert plants under many circumstances unless a person has a valid permit or wood receipt, and the required tags and seals. The appropriate permits, tags and seals must be obtained from the sheriff or commissioner of the county where collecting will occur, and the county will charge a fee. Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCPA) The NCCPA allows for the development of broad -based ecosystem -level plans for the protection and perpetuation of biological diversity. The primary objective of Natural Community Conservation Plans prepared under the NCCPA is to conserve natural communities at the ecosystem level while accommodating compatible land use. Plants protected under an approved Natural Community Conservation Plan may be "taken" by activities covered under the plan, but also typically receive a large amount of conservation and protection. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-26 October 2023 302 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Native Plant Protection Act The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) enacted in 1977 and implemented by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), prohibits the killing or possession of California rare, threatened, or endangered plant species without authorization or permit by CDFW. All state department and governing agencies are required to use their authority to enforce conservation of rare or endangered plant species. State Water Resource Control Board The State Water Resource Control Board and each of its nine Regional Boards regulate the discharge of waste (dredged or fill material) into waters of the United States and waters of the State. Waters of the United States are defined as "any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state" (California Water Code 13030[e]). Section 401 of the CWA requires certification for any federal permit or license authorizing impacts to waters of the U.S. (i.e., waters that are within federal jurisdiction), such as Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Safe Rivers and Harbors Act, to ensure that the impacts do not violate State water quality standards. When a Project could impact waters outside of federal jurisdiction, the Regional Board has the authority under the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act to issue Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to ensure that impacts do not violate state water quality standards. Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certifications, WDRs, and waivers of WDRs are also referred to as orders or permits. When a Project could impact waters outside of federal jurisdiction, the Regional Board has the authority under the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredge or Fill Material to Waters of the State (Procedures) and Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act to issue Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to ensure that impacts do not violate State water quality standards. The Water Boards define an area as wetland as follows: An area is wetland if, under normal circumstances, (1) the area has continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate caused by groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both; (2) the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and (3) the area's vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the area lacks vegetation. Applicants must file an application with the Water Boards for any activity that could result in the discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the state in accordance with California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 3855. 10 112. On April 6, 2021, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a resolution to confirm that the "State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State" is in effect as State policy for water quality control. These Procedures contain a wetland definition in Section II and wetland delineation procedures in Section III, both of which apply to all Water Board programs. The wetland definition encompasses the full range of wetland types commonly recognized in California, including some features not protected under federal law, and reflects current scientific Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-27 October 2023 303 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES understanding of the formation and functioning of wetlands. The purpose of this section is to establish application procedures for discharges of dredged or fill material to waters of the State, which includes both waters of the U.S. and non-federal waters of the State. Fish and Game Code Sections 1600-1603 Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Sections 1600-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, the CDFW regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake, which supports fish or wildlife. A Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW is required pursuant to section 1602 when a project activity may substantially adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. It is important to note that the Fish and Game Code defines fish and wildlife to include: all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, invertebrates, reptiles, and related ecological communities including the habitat upon which they depend for continued viability (FGC Division 5, Chapter 1, section 45 and Division 2, Chapter 1 section 711.2(a) respectively). Furthermore, Division 2, Chapter 5, Article 6, Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code does not limit jurisdiction to areas defined by specific flow events, seasonal changes in water flow, or presence/absence of vegetation types or communities. Regional and Local Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) The CVMSHCP or Plan is a landscape -scale habitat conservation plan covering approximately 1.1 million acres and covers the entire Coachella Valley and surrounding mountains and satisfies Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), NCCPA, and CESA compliance for the permittees under the Plan. The purpose of the CVMSHCP is to obtain take authorization under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the FESA and the NCCPA for Covered Activities in the Coachella Valley. A Memorandum of Understanding ("Planning Agreement") was developed to govern the preparation of the CVMSHCP. The CVMSHCP balances environmental protection and economic development objectives in the Plan Area and simplifies compliance with endangered species related laws. The CVMSHCP is intended to satisfy the legal requirements for the issuance of permits that will allow the Take of species covered by the Plan during the course of otherwise lawful activities. The CVMSHCP will, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize and mitigate the impacts of take by "Covered Activities" (see CVMSHCP) and provide for conservation of the covered species. The CVMSHCP includes the establishment of a Reserve System, setting Conservation Objectives to ensure the conservation of the covered species and conserved natural communities in the CVMSHCP Reserve System, provisions for management of the CVMSHCP Reserve System, and a Monitoring Program, and Adaptive Management. The CVMSHCP Reserve System is divided into 21 Conservation Areas. Because some Take Authorization (loss of or impacts to covered species) is provided under the Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-28 October 2023 304 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Plan for development in Conservation Areas, the actual CVMSHCP Reserve System will be somewhat smaller than the total acres in the Conservation Areas. Project activities that occur within, adjacent to, or in an area of influence of CVMSHCP Conservation Areas are required to implement applicable measures such as the Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, and, Required Avoidance and Minimization Measures, of the CVMSHCP. Further, if a project would encroach into the CVMSHCP Conservation Areas, a Joint Project Review (JPR) would be required. The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is a joint powers authority tasked with overseeing the implementation of the CVMSHCP. Among other responsibilities, CVCC is tasked with conducting the Joint Project Review (JPR) process as defined in Section 6.6.1.1 of the Plan for any potential development taking place in a Conservation Area that may impact Conservation Objectives. The JPR process allows CVCC to facilitate and monitor the implementation of the CVMSHCP and to assist Local Permittees in meeting the Conservation Goals and Objectives of the Plan. 4.4.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The thresholds used to evaluate potential impacts to biological resources are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, development of the proposed Project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it is determined that the Project would: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-29 October 2023 305 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Methodology Biological Technical Report In March 2022, a Project -specific Biological Resources Assessment was provided by Michael Baker International. The Biological Technical Report (referred to as "Biology Report" herein) evaluated the Project site, which included the 969 acres associated with the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, including areas designated for offsite improvements. The Biology Report assessed a total of 969 acres to identify and evaluate impacts to biological resources associated with the proposed Project in the context of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and State and Federal regulations such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and the California Fish and Game Code. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and California Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CIRP) were queried for reported locations of special -status plant and wildlife species as well as special -status natural vegetation communities in the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5-minute quadrangles. Field survey/habitat assessments were conducted on February 17 and 24, 2022, and again on March 03, 2022, to assess and evaluate existing condition of the habitats within the boundaries of the Project site and determine if the existing vegetation communities, at the time of the field surveys, have the potential to provide suitable habitat for special -status plant and wildlife species. The methods used for the Biological Technical Report are consistent with accepted scientific and technical standards and surveys guideline requirements issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), and other applicable agencies/organizations. Field Surveys Michael Baker biologists and regulatory specialists conducted a biological field survey/habitat assessment on February 17, 2022, to document existing conditions and assess the potential for special - status biological resources to occur within the boundaries of the Project site. Additional field surveys were conducted by Michael Baker on February 24 and March 3, 2022. All field surveys were conducted in accordance with applicable protocols and in a way to maximize the detectability of special -status species that may be present within the Project site during the time of the survey. No limitations or access restrictions were encountered by Michael Baker during the field surveys. The jurisdictional delineation was conducted on February 2, 2021, February 3, 2021, February 10, 2021, February 19, 2021, and February 24, 2021. A field delineation was conducted to determine the jurisdictional limits of Water of the U.S. and waters of the State (including potential wetlands), located within the boundaries of the Project site. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-30 October 2023 306 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Prior to conducting the field surveys, literature reviews and records searches were conducted for special status biological resources potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the Project site. Special -status plant and wildlife occurrence records within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5-minute quadrangles were identified through a query of the CNDDB (CDFW 2022a), CIRP (CNPS 2022), and the Calflora Database (Calflora 2022), and for the Project region through a review of IPaC (USFWS 2022a). Additionally, those species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) were identified and reviewed. The current regulatory/conservation status of special -status plant and wildlife species was verified through lists and resources provided by the CDFW, specifically the Special Animals List (CDFW 2022b), State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFW 2022c), Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CDFW 2022d), and State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California (CDFW 2022e). USFWS-designated Critical Habitat for species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) was reviewed online via the Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2022b). Botanical Resources Vegetation communities preliminarily identified on aerial photographs during the literature review were verified in the field by walking meandering transects through the vegetation communities and along boundaries between vegetation communities. Naturally -vegetated areas typically have a higher potential to support special -status plant and wildlife species than areas that are highly disturbed or developed, which have lower quality and/or reduced amounts of suitable habitat for plants and wildlife. All plant and wildlife species observed during the field surveys, as well as dominant plant species within each vegetation community, were recorded in a field notebook. In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, and the overall condition of on -site vegetation communities were recorded. Wildlife Resources Wildlife species detected during the field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other types of evidence were recorded in a field notebook. Field guides used to assist with identification of species during the habitat assessment included The Sibley Guide to Birds (Sibley 2014) for birds, A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003) for herpetofauna, and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Jurisdictional Delineation Michael Baker prepared a Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters Report for the proposed Project. This report was prepared to document aquatic features identified by Michael Baker within the Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-31 October 2023 307 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Project site that are potentially subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and/or Section 13263 of the California Porter - Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). Jurisdictional Delineation Addendum In November 2021, Michael Baker International provided an addendum to the Project -specific Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters Report (Jurisdictional Delineation Report), which included a thorough literature review and a field survey. Off -Site Utility Field Assessment In July 2022, an Off -Site Utility Field Biology Memo was provided by Michael Baker. The Off -Site Utility Field Biology Memo (referred to as "Biology Memo" herein) determined which special -status biological resources has the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the Project site, specifically, within a 2-mile radius of the Project, where the off -site utility field is proposed. According to Michael Baker's review of historic aerial imagery, most of the proposed utility filed parcels have been utilized for agricultural purposes since at least the 1980s. Additional agricultural areas and some residential parcels surround the utility field parcels. Michael Baker conducted a thorough desktop literature review to assess the potential for special -status plant and wildlife species that have been documented or that are likely to occur on or within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. No field surveys were conducted in support of this specific effort. The Biology Memo assesses the known occurrences of the special -status plant and wildlife species that were identified in the CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2022a), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory or Rare Plants (IRP; NCPS 2022), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation Project Planning Tool (IPaC; USFWS 2022a), and other databases as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the Project site. Regulatory/conservation status of special -plant and wildlife species was verified through lists and resources provided by the CDFW, as listed above under the Biological Technical Report subheading. In addition, Michael Baker conducted a desktop review (2021) for potential wetlands and other waters occurring within the utility field parcels and their regulatory status. Other resources reviewed to provide general context on existing conditions within the offsite parcels included Google Earth Pro Historical Aerial Imagery from 1985 to current (Google, Inc. 2022) and the Calflora Database (Calflora 2022). CVMSHCP Joint Project Review As previously discussed, the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) has completed its Joint Project Review (JPR) as required by Section 6.6.1.1 of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-32 October 2023 308 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) for the Project. The CVCC is a joint powers authority tasked with overseeing the implementation of the CVMSHCP, conducting the JPR for any potential development taking place in a Conservation Area or that may impact Conservation Objections. The JPR process allows CVCC to facilitate and monitor the implementation of the CVMSHCP and to assist Local Permittees in meeting the Conservation Goals and Objectives of the Plan. The intention of the JPR document is to inform Permittee(s) whether a proposed development Project complies with CVMSHCP requirements. This JPR has found the Project as proposed consistent with the CVMSHCP if conditioned on the implementation of required Avoidance and Minimization Measures and applicable Land Use Adjacency guidelines as described in the CVMSHCP Plan documents. The Travertine Project also has specific financial requirements that must be met prior to its implementation as outlined in the BO as Conservation Measures 2 through 4. These avoidance and minimization measures and financial commitments are identified as mitigation measures in this DEIR. The impacts subject to the JPR involve the construction of two water tanks and associated infrastructure resulting in disturbance of 6.5 acres of land within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain Conservation Area, 2.3 acres of that is a permanent impact and 4.1 acres is a temporary impact. As noted in the findings section of this report, the total 6.5 acres of disturbance will not significantly impact the conservation objectives CVMSHCP. The Project trail plan has been revised in consultation with the CVCC to relocate trail routes to avoid entry into the Conservation Area. With this change the trail plan is no longer subject to the JPR process. Project Impact Analysis a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special -Status Plants The Project will not impact any federal- or State -listed special -status plant species, as none are expected to occur within the Project site or vicinity. The Project has the potential to impact two non -listed, but rare plant species: California ayenia (Ayenia compacta) and glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis claryana). These plant species are considered rare in California but are more common elsewhere. There are no records of rare plants occurring within the Project site or in the off -site utility field, but each has a moderate to high potential to occur based on existing site conditions, occurrence records, and known distributions. Due to the low sensitivity of the species any impacts to these species, if present, would be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-33 October 2023 309 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Special -Status Animal Species Peninsular bighorn sheep The PBS was not observed on the Project Site during the 2022 field survey performed by Michael Baker. The sheep has a moderate potential to occur on the Project site. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project include site preparation, grading, utility trenching, street construction, and paving. During these phases, heavy-duty construction equipment would be used to perform the required work. In addition, construction workers would be required to travel to and from the Project area, and material delivery and haul trucks would be required to transport supplies to, and debris from, the Project area. Operational impacts from the Project would have a general increase in everyday human activity. Urbanized areas can attract PBS with grass and artificial water sources. Additional potential impacts to PBS include ambient levels of noise or light, predation by domestic pets, and other human disturbances, such as hiking, and invasive ornamental plantings that may encroach into native areas. In 2004, the BLM and BOR initiated consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA regarding the effects of the previously approved Travertine Specific Plan on ten (10) federally -listed species that were identified in a regional species list generated by USFWS in 2003. BLM and BOR, in consultation with USFWS, determined that seven of the species did not have potential to occur on or adjacent to the Project site and thus need not be further considered. Three species (Triple -ribbed milkvetch (Astragalus tricarinatus), desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) and PBS (Ovis canadensis nelson)) were determined to have potential to occur on or adjacent to the Project site. BLM and BOR, in consultation with USFWS, concluded that the project was unlikely to affect triple ribbed milk -vetch and desert tortoise or their critical habitat; however, USFWS concluded that the proposed Project could affect PBS and its designated Critical Habitat. On December 7, 2005, USFWS issued a Biological Opinion (BO; USFWS 2005) addressing this species and its Critical Habitat. The Conservation Measure outlined in the Biological Opinion directs the applicant to 1) reconfigure the Project's footprint to reduce potential effects of the Project on PBS and its critical habitat, 2) acquire lands adjacent to the Project to permanently protect PBS habitat, and 3) provide funds for additional habitat acquisition upon approval of the CVMSHCP, USFWS concluded in the BO that the proposed Project and its cumulative effects are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species, or adversely modify its designated critical habitat. For the current Travertine & Green Specific Plan, take was quantified by the permanent loss or alteration of 267 acres of designated critical habitat containing one or more primary constituent elements that support bighorn sheep populations. The current Project proposal avoids PBS Critical Habitat areas. See Exhibit 4.4-3, PBS Critical Habitat. With implementation of the conservation measures included in the BO, impacts to PBS will be reduced to a less than significant level. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-34 October 2023 310 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Measures included in the BO to avoid direct take of PBS limit habitat loss and avoid indirect construction - related and post -construction -related impacts to PBS and achieve consistency with the CVMSHCP in regard to PBS. These measures focus on trail locations, habitat acquisition and long-term management, funding of research, future evaluations for the need of a wildlife fence, Project design considerations, prohibition of invasive non-native plant species in Project landscaped areas, noise reduction, the prevention of light spillage into open space and the SRSJM Conservation Areas, and provision of educational interpretive materials located along the proposed trail system. These measures have been incorporated in the EIR as Mitigation Measures 113I0-1 through 1310-22. The proposed Project has the potential to result in indirect effects to sensitive resources, including PBS, particularly along the western and southern edges of the Project footprint. In the context of biological resources, indirect effects are those effects associated with developing areas adjacent to adjacent native open space. Potential indirect effects associated with development include water quality impacts associated with drainage into adjacent open space/downstream aquatic resources; lighting effects; noise effects; invasive plant species from landscaping; and effects from human access into adjacent open space, such as recreational activities (including off -road vehicles, hiking, rock climbing), pets, dumping, etc. Temporary, indirect effects may also occur as a result of construction -related activities. The proposed Project include Project Design Features identified in the Project Description section of the DEIR to avoid or minimize these indirect effects, and/or unauthorized access to adjacent open space and SRSJM Conservation Area. The specific requirements for the MSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines are identified as Mitigation Measures BIO-29 through 1310-32. With the implementation of mitigation measures, additional impacts to biological resources as a result of Project development would be reduced to less than significant levels. Desert tortoise No empirical evidence exists that indicates that desert tortoise occupy, or have ever occupied, the Project site and the site provides marginal habitat for the tortoise. Moreover, the BLM and BOR, in consultation with USFWS, determined that desert tortoises are not present in the Project area. The Project is unlikely to affect desert tortoise or their critical habitats. Accordingly, impacts to desert tortoise are expected to be less than significant. Special Status Birds Habitats and vegetation within and surrounding the Project site have the potential to support nesting black -tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, osprey, prairie falcon, and other common birds. No active bird nests or birds displaying nesting behaviors were observed within the Project site during the field surveys. However, the Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland, Larrea tridentate Shrubland, Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and ornamental vegetation communities within the Project site Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-35 October 2023 311 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES provide suitable nesting opportunities for a variety of resident and migratory bird species, including those birds that nest on open ground or within cacti (e.g., burrowing owl,). Construction -related disturbance from the Project site will include human activity, noise, grading and heavy machinery. These activities may have an adverse impact on special status bird species, especially during the breeding season when individuals may be attempting to incubate eggs or raise young within or adjacent to the Project site. Operational impacts from the Project would have a general increase in everyday human activity such as ambient levels of noise or light, predation by domestic pets, and other human disturbances, such as hiking, and invasive ornamental plantings that may encroach into native areas. Additionally, nesting birds are protected pursuant to the MBTA and CFGC. The permanent and temporary loss of the above -listed species and/or their habitat would be potentially significant. Therefore, Mitigation Measures 113I0-23, through BIO-28 are recommended to avoid habitat destruction and/or disturbance of foraging or nesting, and take of nesting birds, including black -tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, osprey, burrowing owl, prairie falcon, and Le Conte's thrasher. Each of these species is discussed in greater detail below. Burrowing Owl The most significant threat to the continued persistence of the burrowing owl is destruction of habitat. The burrowing owl was not observed on the Project site during the field survey performed by Michael Baker (2022). The owl has moderate potential to occur on the site since there is suitable foraging habitat. However, there is marginal nesting habitat for this species due to the onsite soil conditions and minimal number of suitable burrows. The open burrows on the ground occupied by burrowing owls make them particularly exposed and vulnerable to predation by domestic pets and to disturbance from human activities. Pursuant to the CVMSHCP, take avoidance surveys are required prior to construction to avoid the direct harm to burrowing owls. Mitigation Measures 1310-24, BIO-25 and BIO-26 will be implemented to avoid direct harm to burrowing owls, their habitat and nesting sites. LeConte's Thrasher The thrasher was not observed on the Project site and there have been no occurrence records for this species within five miles of the Project site. However, there is moderate potential for the species to occur on the Project site. Although the site provides foraging habitat there is only marginal nesting habitat. The species requires undisturbed substrate for foraging under desert shrubs. The thrasher commonly nests in dense, spiny shrubs or densely branched cactus in desert wash habitat, usually 2-8 feet above ground. The primary threat to this species is loss of habitat due to conversion to urban, agricultural, or other uses, or the degradation of habitat from off -road vehicles, fire, and pesticide use near agricultural areas. Other threats that may be posed by project operations include collisions with cars, and the predation of young by domestic pets. All of these are potentially significant threats to the thrasher. This Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-36 October 2023 312 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES species is protected under the CVMSHCP and pursuant to this plan, Mitigation Measures 1131O-24, 11310- 25 and BIO-27 will be implemented prior to construction to avoid the direct harm to Le Conte's thrasher and its habitat and nesting sites. Black -tailed gnatcatcher The black -tailed gnatcatcher was observed on the Project Site during field surveys. This species was previously designated as a "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFW. However, it no longer merits this status and has now been moved to the CDFW "Watch List". The black -tailed gnatcatcher prefers nesting and foraging in densely lined arroyos and washes dominated by creosote bush and salt brush. The Project site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat which may become disturbed during earth moving activities. Mitigation Measures 1131O-24, BIO-25 and BIO-28 will be implemented to avoid potential harm to nesting birds. Loggerhead shrike The Project site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the loggerhead shrike. The bird was observed on the Project site during the field survey performed by Michael Baker (2021). The loggerhead shrike is designated as a "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFW. Mitigation Measures 1131O-24, 11310- 25 and BIO-28 will be implemented to avoid potential harm to nesting birds. Long-eared owl The long-eared owl is identified by the CDFW as a "Species of Special Concern" and was observed within or adjacent to the Project site. Habitats and vegetation within and surrounding the Project site have the potential to support this species. The Project has the potential to impact the species during the clearing and grading process. Mitigation Measures 1131O-23, -24, -25 and BIO-28 will be implemented to avoid potential harm to nesting birds. Osprey The osprey is on the CDFW "Watch List" and was observed on the Project site. The Project site has habitat and vegetation to support the nesting of this species. Mitigation Measures 1131O-23, -24, -25, and BIO-28 will be implemented to avoid potential harm to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Prairie falcon The Prairie Falcon has a "Watch List" designation by the CDFW. It was not observed on the Project site during the field survey but does have a high probability of occurring on the Project site because of the suitable foraging habitat. The Project site does not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species, as this species prefers cliffs or bluffs for nest sites. Mitigation Measures 1131O-23, BIO-24 and BIO-25 will be Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-37 October 2023 313 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES implemented to avoid potential harm to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. The loss of all special -status bird species from habitat destruction and or noise and human activity disturbance to active nests would be reduced to below a level of significance through the permanent protection of avoided habitat on the Project site and additional habitat on lands to the west and south through a formal conservation instrument (e.g., easement), and implementation of measures provided in the CVCC's Final JPR and the Mitigation Measures in this section. Impacts to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-23 through 113I0-33. Off -Site Utility Field Michael Baker's database review of the proposed off -site utility field determined that the Black -tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, and osprey, that were detected on the Project site, as well as non -listed bird, bat, and mammal species, as well as common bird species protected under the MBTA and CFGC were identified during the literature review may have some potential to occur within the off -site utility field. Therefore, Michael Baker recommends a general biological field survey to document existing conditions and the suitability of habitats within the utility field parcels to support special -status wildlife species such as the burrowing owl, which could potentially occur in the off -site utility field locations. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as CEQA responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. In areas of suitable habitat, focused surveys for burrowing owls may be required. If suitable habitat for burrowing owl is present, two (2) separate preconstruction surveys are required prior to any ground disturbance, one no less than 14 days prior to disturbance, and the other within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance. This is required by Mitigation Measure 113I0-36. Additionally, Mitigation Measures 131O-24, BIO-26 and BIO-28 are recommended to avoid impacts to nesting birds at the off -site utility field area. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service Based on a detailed review of current site conditions and Project design plans, the following regulatory permits/authorizations would be required prior to construction within the identified jurisdictional areas: 1. Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) or similar approval from the Corps to formal receive concurrence that ephemeral aquatic features within the Project site do not qualify as waters of the U.S. (WoUS) and therefore are not subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA; Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-38 October 2023 314 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 2. Regional Board Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for impacts associated with the placement of dredge and/or fill material into waters of the State pursuant to the Porter - Cologne Act; and 3. CDFW Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (or other approval in -lieu of a formal agreement such as an Operation -by -Law letter) for alteration of streambed/banks and/or associated vegetation. Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland is listed as a California Sensitive Natural Community (CDFW 2021) and totals approximately 68.89 acres and is located throughout the Project site. The proposed Project would result in approximately 15.48 acres of permanent impacts and 10.82 acres of temporary impacts to Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) during the clearing, grubbing and grading of the project. The Project's impact to vegetation communities is set forth in Table 4.4-3. Table 4.4-3 Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types and Impacts Vegetation Community/ Land Cover Types Acreage Total Within Project Site Proposed Impacts Permanent Temporary Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland 68.89 15.48 10.82 777 Total 68.89 15.48 10.82 The Parkinsonia florida — Olneyo tesoto Woodland (Blue Palo Verde — Ironwood Woodland) community is also identified as Desert Dry Wash Woodland habitat subject to CDFW jurisdiction. As shown in Table 4.4-2, the Project will result in permanent impacts to 53.15 acres and temporary impacts to 12.15 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed. The Project would temporarily impact approximately 2.67 acres and permanently impact 10.73 acres of Desert Dry Wash Woodland habitat. Approximately 1.26 acres of temporary impacts and 5.82 acres of permanent impacts to Desert Dry Wash Woodland habitat occurs within the CDFW-jurisdictional streambed and the remaining 1.41 acres of temporary impacts and 4.91 acres of permanent impacts to Desert Dry Wash Woodland habitat is associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed. The permanent and temporary loss of this sensitive natural community would be potentially significant prior to mitigation. However, the permanent protection of avoided jurisdictional resources on the Project site and additional habitat on lands to the west and south through a formal conservation instrument (e.g., easement), and implementation of measures provided in the USFWS BO, (refer to Appendix D.1), CVCC's Final JPR (refer to Appendix D.5), and Mitigation Measures BIO-34 and BIO-35 would reduce impacts to level of less than significant. California Department of Fish and Wildlife The on -site drainage features exhibit a clear bed and bank and qualify as a CDFW jurisdictional streambed. Because the CDFW evaluates impacts to the bank of a waterbody as well as the water itself, jurisdiction is taken to the "top of bank" (TOB), which is usually higher than the OHWM. Based on the Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-39 October 2023 315 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES results of the field investigations, a total of approximately 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed occurs within the boundaries of the Project site. In addition, the on -site Parkinsonia florida—Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) community, also identified as Desert Dry Wash Woodland habitat (DDWW), is considered CDFW jurisdiction totaling 55.98 acres, approximately 20.56 acres of which coincides with the 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed and an additional 35.42 acres of DDWW habitat is associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed. Based on a review of Project design plans, the proposed Project would temporarily impact approximately 12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed. In addition, the proposed Project would temporarily impact approximately 2.67 acres and permanently impact 10.73 acres of DDWW habitat under CDFW jurisdiction. Approximately 1.26 acres of temporary impacts and 5.82 acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat occurs within the CDFW-jurisdictional streambed and the remaining 1.41 acres of temporary impacts and 4.91 acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat is associated with the CDFW-jurisdictional streambed. Therefore, prior to alteration of CDFW jurisdictional features, the Project proponent must acquire a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) prior to the initiation of Project construction. This would include a formal SAA notification to, and subsequent authorization of a LSAA by, the CDFW. The CDFW also requires that compliance with CEQA is completed prior to issuing a final LSAA. The instant EIR has been prepared to satisfy CDFW's CEQA compliance obligations. In addition, a notification fee is required, which for a standard LSAA is calculated based on anticipated cost of the Project. Evidence of an OHWM was noted within the boundaries of the Project site. However, aquatic features within the Project site are considered ephemeral and do not meet the definition of a WOTUS pursuant to the latest USACE guidelines established in 2015 for the mapping of WOTUS, including wetlands. Therefore, onsite aquatic features would not be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA and would not fall under USACE' jurisdiction. Regional Water Quality Control Board On -site features qualify as water of the State under RWQCB jurisdiction, consisting of approximately 90.96 acres of non -wetland waters of the State. Based on a review of Project design plans, the proposed Project would temporarily impact approximately 12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of non -wetland water of the State (see Figure 4.4-5 Regional Board & CDFW Jurisdictional Impact Map). In the absence of a Section 404 permit issued from the USACE, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification is not applicable. However, a Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) issued by the RWQCB would be required prior to commencement of any construction activities within RWQCB jurisdictional areas. The RWQCB also requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to issuance of the final WDR. The instant EIR is anticipated to satisfy RWQCB's CEQA compliance obligations. Further, an application fee is required, which is based on both total temporary and permanent impact acreages (as applicable). Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-40 October 2023 316 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Table 4.4-4 Jurisdictional Impact Jurisdiction Acres Impact Regional Board Non -Wetland Waters & CDFW 25.66 acres No Impact Jurisdictional5treambed 12.15 acres Temporary Impact 53.15 acres Permanent Impact 42.58 acres No Impact CDFW Desert Dry Wash Woodland Habitat 2.67 acres Temporary Impact 10.73 acres Permanent Impact Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-41 October 2023 317 33.612921 -116.272715AN 0 SEE INSET MAP 33.584164 -116.249242 NMI Legend Project Site Regional Board Non -Wetland Waters & -CDFW Jurisdictional StreambedCDFW Regional Board Non -Wetland Waters & Jurisdictional Streambed Regional Board Non -Wetland Waters & -CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed =Temporary Impact Area No Impact (25.66 Acres) Temporary Impact (12.15 Acres) Permanent Impact (53.15 Acres) =Permanent Impact Area CDFW Desert Dry Wash Woodland CDFW Desert Dry Wash Woodland CDFW Desert Dry Wash Woodland Habitat No Impact (42.58Acres) Habitat Temporary Impact (2.67 Acres) Habitat Permanent Impact (10.73 Acres) ® Reference Point •------• Discontinuous Sheet Flow MSS► LTI Nt i 1 P 0 400 800 JURISDICTIONAL IMPACT MAP Feet TRAVERTINE - } •-' 711,1 5,_ �; •Yrt. :.I; J�_�- ~tifj } 1 � lCr�00I: 7'I! Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP), 2018 EXHIBIT 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Off -Site Utility Field Based on an assessment conducted by Michael Baker, aquatic features potentially falling under State jurisdiction are present within the off -site locations. The review indicated that an agricultural pond and a potential wetland area is located within the off -site area. Based on the analysis provided by Michael Baker (2021), these features potentially fall under regulatory jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or CDFW pursuant to the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the California Fish and Game Code CFGC, respectively. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as CEQA lead agencies, and once site - specific locations of the infrastructure is available. A jurisdictional delineation is recommended at these off -site areas, once the site locations for the wells and the substation have been determined to assess the potential regulatory status of these features the degree to which they may be impacted by installation of water wells and the electric power substation. This recommendation is reflected in Mitigation Measure BI0-37. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The limits of the Corps' jurisdiction in non -tidal waters extend to the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM), which is defined as "...that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area" (33 C.F.R. § 328.2(e)). As discussed above, evidence of an OHWM was noted within the boundaries of the Project site. However, although an OHWM is present, aquatic features within the Project site are considered ephemeral and do not meet the definition of a Waters of the US pursuant to the latest USACE guidelines established in 2015 for mapping of Water of the US, including wetlands. Therefore, onsite aquatic features would not be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA and would not fall under USACE' jurisdiction. The proposed Project site does not contain any state or federally protected wetlands and will not result in any impacts to this resource. Off -Site Utility Field As stated under discussion b, Michael Baker's desktop analysis of the off -site utility field determined that aquatic features potentially falling under State jurisdiction are present within the off -site locations. However, these features do not appear to have a connection to interstate commerce via Relatively Permanent Waters (RPW) or Traditional Navigable Waters (TNW), and as a result, are not anticipated to Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-43 October 2023 319 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES be jurisdictional to the US Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected at the off -site locations. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Land uses surrounding the Project site to the south and west consist primarily of vacant land that transitions to the Martinez Rockslide and the Santa Rosa Mountains. Vacant land under the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) occurs along the western border and the existing CVWD, Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility and residential development occurs along the northeast border of the Project site. Any wildlife currently utilizing the Project site and adjacent areas for dispersal and movement are likely adapted to disturbances associated with such environments. Wildlife movement, especially PBS, potentially occurs within the open SRSJM Conservation Area to the south and west of the Project site. Conservation and protection of these areas would continue to provide opportunities for local wildlife movement and function as a corridor for PBS and other highly mobile wildlife species. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected to corridor movement. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. The proposed Project and the off -site utility field will be developed in accordance with local, State, and federal biological resource plans and policies, including those associated with the BLM California Desert Conservation Plan, the multi -agency PBS Recovery Plan and the CVMSHCP. The City of La Quinta does not have a tree preservation policy or ordinance and relies on the CVMSHCP. Therefore, the Project and off -site improvements will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. As previously noted, the Project, and the off -site utility field area, are located within the Plan boundaries of the CVMSHCP and are subject to its provisions. The CVMSHCP identifies the Travertine Specific Plan as a "Covered Activity". The majority of the Project footprint is located outside of the adjacent CVMSHCP Conservation Area. However, approximately 36.89 acres of the Project footprint are within the Conservation Area, including 15.65 acres associated with the proposed water tank facility (6.40 acres of permanent impacts and 9.25 acre of remedial grading), 9.52 acres associated with the Jefferson Street extension, 6.81 acres associated with the improvements to the existing Guadalupe Dike, 4.41 acres associated with offsite flood protection along the western edge of the Project, and 0.45 acre associated with a proposed trail. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-44 October 2023 320 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Project applicant submitted a Joint Project Review request for the Project in early 2021. The proposed Project warrants special consideration under the CVMSHCP. The development Project will result in 6.5 acres of disturbance inside the Conservation Area. An additional 2.25 acres of development will occur within the Conservation Area on land owned by the Bureau of Land Management, who is not a signatory under the CVMSHCP and whose land is not covered by the JPR process (refer to Exhibit 4.4- 2, Coachella Valley MHHCP). The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission staff have assessed these impacts on the stated Conservation Objectives for the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area and presented their findings in a report dated March 31, 2021. The conclusion of the JPR report did not identify any impacts to the modeled habitat for covered species, natural communities, or essential ecological processes protected by the Plan. Nonetheless, CVCC encourages the applicant to restore any temporary disturbance resulting from the construction of the water tanks and access road, and to ensure that any operation and maintenance activities minimize disturbance to surrounding wildlife resources. This finding assumes the Project applicant will implement all required Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation measures (AMMs) and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines. If, during a subsequent project review, it is identified that the Project has failed to implement these practices, or if the disturbance footprint has changed substantially from that reviewed here, this consistency finding shall be rendered null and void. Project approval by the Local Permittee shall be conditioned on the incorporation of all pertinent AMMs and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines. The findings of the JPR are discussed further in Section 4.4.4, Methodology. The CVCC determined through the JPR process that the Project will not result in significant impacts and is consistent with the conservation objectives of the CVMSHCP. This JPR has found the Project as proposed consistent with the CVMSHCP if conditioned on the implementation of required Avoidance and Minimization Measures and applicable Land Use Adjacency guidelines as described in the CVMSHCP Plan documents. The purpose of CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines is to avoid or minimize indirect effects from development proposed to occur adjacent to or within a Conservation Area. Such indirect impacts are commonly referred to as edge effects and may include noise light, drainage, intrusion of people, and the introduction of non-native plants and non- native predators such as dogs and cats. The applicable MHSCP Avoidance and Minimization Measures are already recommended for inclusion in the Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program For the above reasons, the Project will not conflict with the CVMSHCP, and impacts are therefore less than significant. Further, Project approval by the Local Permittees (City of La Quinta, IID and CVWD) shall be conditioned on the incorporation of all pertinent Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures (AMMs) and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines as described in the CVMSHCP. Special consideration is to be given to AMMs for burrowing owl, desert tortoise, Le Conte's thrasher, and PBS habitat. Project approval shall Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-45 October 2023 321 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES also be contingent on the applicant's fulfillment of the funding responsibilities identified as required measures of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. For the above reasons, the Project will not conflict with the MSHCP and impacts are therefore less than significant. 4.4.5 Cumulative Impacts The CVMSHCP is landscape level habitat conservation plan and addresses cumulative impacts of development on biological resources. The CVMSHCP replaces a piecemeal approach to project approval and mitigation with a coordinated, comprehensive approach based on the basic conventions of biological reserve design. This approach ensures that project mitigation is directed to those areas most critical to maintenance of ecosystem function and species viability. The ultimate build out of the City of La Quinta pursuant to its adopted General Plan has the potential to impact biological resources by reducing native habitat areas and directly affecting fauna. Continued urban growth and development in the City may be expected to result in displacement and loss of habitat for wildlife species occurring on currently undeveloped or sparsely developed lands. Where the native habitat is still present in the City, it may be impacted by increased vehicle travel, alteration of soils, vegetation removal, and habitat degradation associated with new development. When considered in combination with other cumulative developments within the City, there is potential for adverse cumulative effects to biological resources. The City of La Quinta requires the preparation of special studies for projects in the City in areas where non -covered sensitive species occur or are identified in the General Plan. The studies provide an assessment of the potential impacts, and recommend mitigation measures, if necessary. Further, the City of La Quinta General Plan establishes Natural Open Space land use designations within the City. These Natural Open Space Areas occur in the western and southern portions of the City, in hillside areas, and provide potential habitat for the endangered PBS. Development within Natural Open Space designated areas will not occur in the City, therefore, protecting biological resources. Therefore, with adherence to policies and programs as identified in this section, all new development will assist in minimizing cumulative impacts in regard to biological resources. The proposed Project and other future projects within the City, its Sphere of Influence and surrounding jurisdictions must also comply with all local, State, and federal laws and policies and all applicable permitting requirements. Additionally, future projects in the area will be mitigated through the payment of conservation fees implemented by the CVMSHCP. To the degree that the Project may impact federal lands not subject to the CVMHHCP, those impacts are marginal, have been fully mitigated through the terms of the Biological Opinion, and are not expected to result in a cumulatively considerable impact on biological resources. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-46 October 2023 322 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Therefore, with adherence to policies and programs as identified in this section, the Project's impacts on biological resources will not be cumulatively considerable. 4.4.6 Mitigation Measures The following sections provide project -specific mitigation measures for potential direct and indirect impacts to biological resources identified in the DEIR. Measures Specific to Peninsular Bighorn Sheep B1O-1 Consistent with the terms of the Project Biological Opinion, an 8-foot-tall wildlife fence constructed of tubular steel and painted to blend in with the desert environment shall be installed where the Project interfaces with Coral Mountain along the northern boundary and extend southward along the western and southern boundary of proposed development to preclude PBS from entering the Project. The fence shall extend to where Avenue 62 intersects with the eastern Project boundary. B1O-2 All lighting located within the development footprint shall conform with the requirements outlined in the Travertine Specific Plan and the MSHCP. B1O-3 Where the Project is located adjacent to the SRSJM Conservation Area along its western edge, a minimum buffer of 74 feet shall be incorporated between SRSJM undeveloped native desert areas and private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas. Each private homeowner parcel along this western edge shall have fencing at the top of slope with Lexan panels to dampen noise to an appropriate level. BIO-4 All plant species identified as invasive by the CVMSHP, or that are known to be toxic to PBS, will be prohibited from inclusion in Project landscaping including areas adjacent to proposed open space. Prior to site disturbance a Project -specific list of prohibited plant species will be prepared by a qualified biologist for use in developing the Project Landscape Plan. This will include plants identified as invasive by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) and the CVMSHCP. The City shall review the landscape palette prior to planting. B1O-S The final design and location of natural trails will be approved by the USFWS and the City to minimize disturbance to PBS. Unauthorized trails currently in use on the Property will be closed to minimize impacts to bighorn sheep and replaced with the trail proposed as part of the Project. Other than this trail, no additional trails would be proposed or allowed as part of the Project. To restrict human access to surrounding hills, including: (a) placement of "no trespass" signs at legally enforceable intervals along the trail and habitat/development interface, with legally enforceable language; (b) development of CC&Rs and educational materials that explain to residents and members the ecology of bighorn sheep and the rules concerning unauthorized hiking into sheep habitat. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-47 October 2023 323 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 131O-6 Project proponent shall permanently protect 19.7 acres in Section 5 as bighorn sheep habitat. Prior to recording the first final map, Project proponent also has committed to acquire an additional approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 that also are strategically located to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller units with reduced development potential. All lands proposed for conservation in Section 5 will be approved by the Service and protected in perpetuity consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq. For more detail, please refer to the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment. B1O-7 Project proponent shall establish a $500,000 endowment with the Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM) to be managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to assist with the long-term management of bighorn sheep. Of this total, $100,000 will be provided upon issuance of the first grading permit, with the balance of $400,000 paid in installments of $100,000 per year over the succeeding four years. 13I0-8 Project proponent shall provide an additional $100,000 to the CNLM endowment above to support the gathering of information on the effects of the regional trails system on bighorn sheep, including trails in and around the Project site. 131O-9 The Jefferson Street extension through Section 32 will be constructed using active and passive design features to prevent public roadside parking and foot access into bighorn sheep habitat (e.g., boulders, k-rail, berm, narrow road shoulder, bar ditch, and restrictive signage), subject to review and approval by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. BIO-10 Within the project boundary, approximately 100 yards at the west end of the newly constructed Jefferson Street Loop in the southwest comer of Section 33, where it connects with the Avenue 62 alignment, will be left as undeveloped desert. The distance in some places will be less than 100 yards but other features such as "manufactured slopes" and "property fences" will be used, as shown in Figure 4 — BO Conservation Measure #7 of the Project Biological Opinion. This design feature, in combination with enhanced native landscaping, will discourage unauthorized vehicle access into bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 adjacent to the Travertine project boundary. BIO-11 No exotic plants known to be toxic to PBS, or invasive in desert environments, will be used in project landscaping. BIO-12 The Project shall not provide direct public access from internal streets to hillside sheep habitat. BIO-13 The Project Nature Trail will form the southern and western perimeters of the Project. BIO-14 To deter bighorn sheep access to the project site, natural landscaping and property fences around residential areas would reduce noise, light, and visual impacts on surrounding hills. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-48 October 2023 324 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-15 The best management practices shall be used to preclude the establishment of potential disease vectors at open water features (i.e., water bodies will be designed with steep, unvegetated slopes and deep enough water to prevent establishment of emergent wetland vegetation). BIO-16 CC&R's and Project Specific Plan conditions shall prohibit activities that emit noise above specified levels (not to exceed 60 dB(A) for sensitive receptors or 75 dB(A) for non-residential receptors (per City Ordinance 9.100.210 Noise Control). For example, only quiet electric golf carts will be used for service and maintenance. BIO-17 Outdoor lighting will be down -shielded and directed away from the hillsides in accordance with the City municipal code. BIO-18 To increase public awareness regarding the sensitivity of PBS in the region, educational materials will be provided to homeowners and made available to users of the public facilities within the Travertine development. This material will be prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and CDFW. In addition, the Project proponent will provide within the project an area dedicated as an interpretive center concerning the bighorn sheep. BIO-19 The two water reservoirs will be constructed of steel or concrete and buried underground to the extent possible, or screened by landscaped berms. Any tank appurtenances (e.g., valves) remaining above -ground will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat and to prevent light from being reflected toward sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains. BIO-20 Dogs and other pets are not allowed within the National Monument and appropriate signage at the designated trailhead parking areas and any other access points will be installed to prohibit dogs along the Nature Trail. CC&Rs and club rules will require pets to remain on a leash while outside enclosed areas, and will prohibit pets from entering the hills at any time. Compliance with the local "leash law" will also be enforced pursuant to City ordinance and the project's Specific Plan conditions. BIO-21 The acreage of the Project Site that is located within the MSHCP Conservation Area shall be dedicated to Conservation in perpetuity. BIO-22 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent will provide a no -interest $2,000,000 loan to the CVCC or its designee upon mutually agreeable terms to acquire Essential bighorn sheep Habitat in the project area. This provision may be revised or substituted for in a manner of equal or greater benefit to the Plan upon mutual agreement of CVCC, the Wildlife Agencies, and the Project proponent. Workers Environmental Awareness Program Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-49 October 2023 325 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-23 A Qualified Biologist will prepare and present to each employee (including temporary, contractors, and subcontractors) a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) prior to the worker's initiation of work on the Project site. Workers shall also be advised by the Qualified Biologist of the special -status wildlife species in the Project site, the steps to avoid impacts to the species and the potential penalties for taking such species. At a minimum, the WEAP will include the following information: occurrence of the listed and sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, legal protection afforded to these species, penalties for violations of federal and State laws, reporting requirements, and Project features and mitigation measures designed to reduce the impacts to these species and promote continued successful occupation of habitats within the Project area. Included in this WEAP will be color photographs of the listed species, which will be shown to the employees. Following the WEAP, the photographs will be posted in the contractor and resident engineer office, where they will remain through the duration of the Project. The contractor, resident engineer, and the Qualified Biologist will be responsible for ensuring that employees are aware of the listed species and observe reporting and mitigation and avoidance requirements. A record of all trained personnel will be kept with the construction foreman onsite. If new construction personnel are added to the project, the construction foreman will ensure that new personnel receive WEAP training before they start working. Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Special Status Species and Wildlife BIO-24 Prior to issuance of grading permit, a qualified biologist will be designated to monitor construction activities and advise construction personnel of the sensitive biological resources on site that may be impacted by, and conversely, that must be avoided during site development. A biological monitor will be on site to monitor avoidance activities and to monitor all clearing and grubbing activities, as well as grading, excavation, and/or other ground -disturbing activities in jurisdictional areas to ensure that impacts do not exceed the limits of grading and to minimize the likelihood of inadvertent impacts on special -status species. The monitor will flush avian species and remove and relocate, if possible, non -avian species to a safe location outside of the immediate construction zone (generally 1,000 feet or more onto public lands, when feasible). Where appropriate, the biological monitorwill mark/flag the limits of environmental sensitive areas (ESAs) to restrict project activities near the areas. These restricted areas will be monitored to protect the species during construction. The biological monitor will ensure that all biological mitigation measures, BMPs, avoidance and protection measures described in the relevant project permits, approvals, licenses, and environmental reports, and CEQA documents, are in place and are adhered to. Monitoring will cease when the sensitive habitats and jurisdictional areas have been cleared or impacted. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-50 October 2023 326 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The biological monitor will ensure that construction activities will maintain measures to prevent accidental trapping of wildlife into excavated areas and inspect excavated areas daily to detect the presence of trapped wildlife. All deep or steep -walled excavated areas should be covered with plywood or other weight bearing material and will be furnished with escape ramps at a 3:1 slope or are surrounded with exclusionary fencing in order to prevent wildlife from entering them. Trapped wildlife should be relocated out of harm's way to a suitable habitat outside of the project area. The biological monitor will have the authority to temporarily halt all construction activities and all non -emergency actions if ESAs and special -status species are identified and will be directly impacted. The monitor will notify the appropriate resource agency and consult if needed. If needed, and if possible, the biological monitor will relocate the individual outside of the work area where it will not be harmed. Work can continue at the location if the project proponent and the consulted resource agency determine that the activity will not result in impacts on the species. All biological monitor observations of special -status species will be documented and mapped in monitoring logs. Monitoring logs will be completed for each day of monitoring. All special - status species recordings will be submitted to the CNDDB. The biological monitors will be responsible for documenting compliance with avoidance measures, the results of the surveys and the ongoing monitoring, and will provide a copy of the monitoring reports for impact areas to the County EPD and any permitting agencies that require reporting. The appropriate agencies will be notified if a dead or injured protected species is located within the project site. Written notification will be made within 15 days of the date and time of the finding or incident (if known) and will include: location of the carcass, a photograph, cause of death (if known), and other pertinent information. BIO-25 Prior to issuance of grading permits and commencement of any ground -disturbing activities or vegetation removal the following measures would be implemented to avoid impacts on ESAs, surrounding habitats, and special status species and wildlife: a. Project footprint would be set at the minimum size to accomplish necessary work, and the footprint will be of a size/area no greater than is identified in the CEQA documentation, to minimize impacts on sensitive biological resources. b. Specifications for the project boundary, limits of grading, project related parking, storage areas, laydown sites, and equipment storage areas would be mapped and clearly marked in the field with temporary fencing, signs, stakes, flags, rope, cord, or other appropriate markers. All markers would be maintained until the completion of activities in that area. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-51 October 2023 327 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES c. To minimize the amount of disturbance, the construction/laydown activities, parking, staging, storage, spoil management, and equipment access will be restricted to designated areas. Designated areas will comprise existing disturbed areas (parking lots, access roads, graded areas, etc.) to the extent possible. d. Designated staging areas will be enclosed with temporary security fencing. All staging areas will comply with conditions in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP), which provides BMPs to avoid or mitigate erosion impacts during construction. e. Project -related work limits would be defined and work crews would be restricted to designated work areas. Disturbance beyond the actual construction zone will be prohibited without site -specific surveys. If sensitive biological resources are detected in an area to be impacted, then appropriate measures would be implemented to avoid impacts (i.e., flag and avoid, erect orange construction fencing, biological monitor present during work, etc.). However, if avoidance is not possible and the sensitive biological resources would be directly impacted by project activities, the biologist would mark and/or stake the site(s) and map the individuals on an aerial map and with a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. The biologist would then contact the appropriate resource agencies to develop additional avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures prior to commencing project activities. f. ESAs would be identified, mapped, clearly marked in the field, and avoided to the maximum extent practicable in order to avoid and minimize impacts on sensitive biological resources. g. Existing roads and trails would be utilized wherever possible to avoid unnecessary impacts. Project related vehicle traffic would be restricted to established roads, staging areas, and parking areas. Travel outside construction zones will be prohibited. h. Monitoring would occur periodically during the length of construction activities to ensure project limits, designated areas (parking, storage, etc.), and ESAs are still clearly marked. i. Signs will be installed on boundaries of the Project Site and other strategic locations to notify the public of the sensitive biological resources identified onsite and prohibit entry into key high value habitat areas. BIO-26 Prior to construction, the construction area and adjacent habitat within 500 feet of the construction area, or to the edge of the property if less than 500 feet, will be surveyed by a Qualified Biologist for burrows that could be used by burrowing owl. Two (2) surveys will be conducted, with one survey to be conducted between 14 and 30 days prior to site disturbance, and a second survey to be conducted within 24 hours of site disturbance, following methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-52 October 2023 328 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Department of Fish and Game 2012). If a burrow is located, the Qualified Biologist will determine if an owl is present in the burrow. If the burrow is determined to be occupied, the burrow will be flagged and a 160-foot buffer during the non -breeding season and a 250-foot buffer during the breeding season, or a buffer to the edge of the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the burrow. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No construction will be permitted within the buffer until the young are no longer dependent on the burrow. If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow will be made inaccessible to burrowing owls, and construction activities may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, burrowing owls shall be relocated pursuant to accepted protocols and in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies (CDFW and USFWS). A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that, based on surveys conducted following protocol, at least one burrowing owl has been observed occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. If there are no records for the site, surveys must be conducted to determine, prior to construction, if burrowing owls are present. Determination of the appropriate method of relocation, such as eviction/passive relocation or active relocation, shall be based on the specific site conditions (e.g., distance to nearest suitable habitat and presence of burrows within that habitat) in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and maintenance of suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. BIO-27 Prior to the start of construction activities during the nesting season (February 15t through August 315t) in modeled Le Conte's thrasher habitat in the SRSJM Conservation Area, surveys will be Conducted by a Qualified Biologist on the construction site and within 500 feet of the construction site, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet. If nesting Le Conte's thrashers are found, a 500-foot buffer, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the nest site. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No construction will be permitted within the buffer during the breeding season (January 15 through June 15) or until the young have fledged. BIO-28 Vegetation clearing shall be conducted outside of the nesting season, which is generally identified as February 1 through August 31. Alternatively, and only if avoidance of the nesting season is not feasible, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days prior to any disturbance of the site, including disking, demolition activities, and grading. If active nests are identified, the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and the juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests. BIO-29 Drainage and Toxics: Project stormwater runoff will be conveyed eastward toward the Dike 4 impound and away from Project surrounding open space, and SRSJM Conservation Area. Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-53 October 2023 329 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Stormwater retention basins are designed to provide requisite water quality treatment, including bio-remediation. Subsequent engineering will include preparation of a SWPPP that will ensure against increased runoff and protect water quality during and post -construction. BIO-30 Artificial Lighting: Night lighting shall be directed away from adjacent open space and SRSJM Conservation Area to protect wildlife from direct night lighting. Light fixtures adjacent to open space will be shielded and utilize low intensity lighting. If night lighting is required during construction, shielding shall be incorporated to ensure ambient lighting adjacent conservation lands are not increased. BIO-31 Noise: The Project will incorporate setbacks, as specified in the Specific Plan to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife. BIO-32 Unauthorized Access: The Project will incorporate signage, fencing, gates, and similar measures and barriers to inform the hiking public and to avoid or minimize unauthorized access to adjacent open space lands. BIO-33 California Desert Native Plants Act: The applicant will collect California Desert Native Plan Act protected plants, including California barrel cactus (Ferocactus cylindraceus), Gander's buckhorn cholla (Cylindropuntia ganderi), Englemann's hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus engelmannii), cottontop cactus (Echinocactus polycephalus), beavertail cactus (Opuntia basilaris), branched pencil cholla (Cylindropuntia ramossissima), ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens), catclaw (Acacia greggii), blue paloverde (Parkinsonia florida), and smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus) and prioritize reuse of plant materials onsite. A permit from the Agriculture Commissioner of the County of Riverside shall be obtained prior to collection and relocation of these species. Jurisdictional Areas Avoidance and Protection Measures BIO-34 Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the project, and prior to initiating any work that may impact jurisdictional waters identified in the Travertine Project Biological Resources Assessment, the Project -specific Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International, and the off -site utility field assessment prepared by Michael Baker International, dated March 2022, June 2021, and June 2022, respectively, the Project proponent shall provide notice to CDFW and obtain a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement as required pursuant to California Fish and Game Code sections 1602-1616. BIO-35 Impacts to CDFW jurisdictional waters shall be mitigated pursuant to a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) which will be prepared to identify specific on -site and/or off -site mitigation activities that will be implemented to compensate for unavoidable impacts to CDFW jurisdictional areas. Impacts to non -riparian waters will be mitigated at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Impacts to riparian vegetation will be mitigated at a minimum 1:1 ratio. The HMMP will further identify the mitigation program coordinated with and approved by CDFW, set Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-54 October 2023 330 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES mitigation success criteria, and guide a five-year qualitative and quantitative mitigation monitoring program to track mitigation success. Annual reports will be submitted to CDFW each year for five years, summarizing mitigation performance against the success criteria. Mitigation measures identified above would also be applied to the off -site utility fields when applicable. Mitigation measures specific to the off -site utility field Biological Resources are identified subsequently. BIO-36: A general biological field survey to document existing conditions and the suitability of habitats within the utility field parcels to support special -status wildlife species such as burrowing owl, which could potentially occur on -site. Regardless of focused survey findings, if suitable habitat for burrowing owl is present, two (2) separate preconstruction surveys are required prior to any ground disturbance, one no less than 14 days prior to disturbance, and the other within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance. Should take of burrowing owl be expected, a relocation plan and extensive coordination to move animals offsite can be expected. BIO-37: A regulatory specialist should be consulted to determine if a jurisdictional delineation is necessary. If so, a jurisdictional delineation should be conducted to determine the presence or absence and potential regulatory status of any jurisdictional features should it be determined they may be impacted by installation of water wells and the electric power substation within a proposed impact area. Impacts to jurisdictional features may require regulatory permits from the USACE, RWQCB, and/or the CDFW as applicable. 4.4.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation With the implementation of Mitigation Measures 11310-1 through BIO-37 impacts to biological resources are reduced to less than significant. 4.4.8 References 1. Environmental Protection Agency, May 2020 https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary- enda ngered-species-act 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 2020 https://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/hcp- overview.html (May 2020) 3. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Chapter III Natural Resources, May 2020, October 2022 https://www.laquintaca.gov/business/design-and-development/planning-division/2035-la- quinta-general-plan 4. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, May 2020, December 2022 https://cvmshcp.org/plan-documents/ Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-55 October 2023 331 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 5. CVMSHCP 2019 Annual Report (June 2020) 6. CVMSHCP 2021 Annual Report (April 2022) https://cvmshcp.org/annual-reports/Annual-Report- 2021.pdf 7. Travertine Project Biological Resources Analysis, Michael Baker International, (May 2022) 8. Travertine Project Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (June 2021) 9. Travertine Project Addendum to Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (November 2021) 10. Coachella Valley Conservation Commission Joint Project Review Summary (February 2021) 11. Offsite Utility Field Memo, Michael Baker International (July 2022) Travertine Draft EIR 4.4-56 October 2023 332 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.5 Cultural Resources 4.5 Cultural Resources 4.5.1 Introduction This section discusses the cultural resources that may be present in the Project property or in the vicinity. It assesses potential impacts to these resources from Project construction and operation. Cultural resource descriptions and analyses are based on information contained in the Addendum to the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Land Development Project prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants ("SWCA") in November 2021("Cultural Report"). Additional cultural resources studies were completed for the Project property in 2006, 2007, and 2017, also by SWCA. These reports are included in the Appendices of this Draft EIR as Appendix E.1 and Appendix E.2. Additional sources used in the preparation of this section are identified in Subsection 4.5.8, References, of this Cultural Resources Section, and Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. 4.5.2 Existing Conditions Environmental Setting The Project property is located within the City of La Quinta in the southeastern area of the Coachella Valley. The Valley lies within the Colorado subarea of the Sonoran Desert and is an arid low -desert region. The Project property is located at and near the margins of past stands of ancient Lake Cahuilla that reached elevations of about 42 feet above sea level. Today, the closest water body is the man-made reservoir of Lake Cahuilla located approximately 1.20 miles to the north. The Salton Sea is the most recent stand of Lake Cahuilla and is located 13 miles southeast of the Project property. The Coachella Valley climate is arid with seasonal temperature extremes and wind patterns. Summer temperatures can reach 125 degrees Fahrenheit (52 degrees Celsius), with frost in the winter and snow in the early spring in the surrounding mountains. The mountains reach elevations of 6,000—10,000 feet and create a rain shadow effect in the valley. Due to the rain shadow effect, very little precipitation reaches the eastern slopes or the valley floor. The annual average rainfall is about 3.25 inches with precipitation coming from both winter storms and summer thunder showers. Runoff from the seasonally active streams within washes that empty into the valley quickly sinks into the alluvial fans at the mouths of the canyons. Cultural Setting Prehistoric Period Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-1 October 2022 333 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES California's southeastern desert region has a long history of human occupation stretching back to the early Holocene circa (ca.) 10,000 years B.C. (Moratto 1984:96-97; Schaefer 1994:64; Sutton et al. 2007:233-237)1. Prehistoric culture in this region has been categorized according to periods or patterns that define technological, economic, social, and ideological elements. Within these periods, archaeologists have defined cultural patterns or complexes specific to prehistory within the desert region, including the current Project's Area of Potential Effect (APE). The chronological framework developed for the Colorado Desert region is divided into three major periods: Paleoindian Period (ca. 10,000-6,000 B.C.), Archaic Period (6,000 B.C. — A.D. 870), and Late Prehistoric Period (A.D. 870 — Historic Contact). The timeframes referenced in the following discussion are presented either in radiocarbon years before present (B.P.) (where "present" is 1950) or calendar dates (years B.C./A.D.), as well as geologic era. Paleoindian Period (ca. 10,000-6,000 B.C. [12, 000-8, 000 B. P-D The precise timing and nature of human migration into North America continues to be a matter of considerable debate (e.g., Adovasio 2002; Dillehay 1997; Jablonski 2002; Swedlund and Anderson 1999), with the first occupation of the continent occurring at the end of the Pleistocene (e.g., Antevs 1995; Major 1988). The environment was cooler and moist, and megafauna such as mammoths, camels, and ground sloths were abundant and exploited by the earliest human migrants. The cultural resources typically associated with this period consists of Clovis and Folsom fluted projectile points, and other lanceolate (lance -shaped), leaf shaped, and stemmed points, including the Lake Mojave and Silver Lake projectile points. Fluted projectile points believed to be Clovis occur in several locales throughout California, including Pleistocene China and Thompson Lakes in the Mojave Desert, though lingering contextual questions prevent affirmation of Clovis technology (Rondeau et al. 2007: 66). Evidence of human occupation in California prior to 6,000 B.C. is relatively sparse and scattered. Evidence for human occupation of the Colorado Desert during the Pleistocene (2.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and early Holocene (epoch following Pleistocene) is sparse, though this scarcity could reflect adaptation of highly mobile groups to sparse resources as well as the potential result of unstable landforms during the Holocene. At the onset of the Holocene ca. 10,000 B.P., there was significant warming and drying in the Colorado Desert, and hunter -gather groups adapted their subsistence to the changing environment, with lakes and streams in the desert interior gradually drying up. Archaic Period (ca. 6,000 B.C.-A.D. 870 [8000 -1200 B.P-D Around 6,000 B.C., the shift in subsistence patterns in tandem with the changing environment placed greater emphasis on plant resources and smaller animal species. Subsistence patterns became more diversified, focusing on gathering in the interior, and maritime resources in the coastal regions References within the discussion of the cultural setting are provided in the project's supporting cultural reports. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-2 October 2022 334 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES (Erlandson 1997:4). The Archaic period is characterized by this shift to gathering, which resulted in the increased number of ground stone implements in the artifact assemblage, including metates (immobile slabs of rock used as a base for grinding seeds and other plant products) and manos (hand stones used for grinding seeds and other plant products). Within the Colorado Desert, the Archaic period is divided into two sub -periods: the Early Archaic period or Pinto complex (6,000 B.C.-2,000 B.C.), and the Late Archaic period or Gypsum complex (2,000 B.C.—A.D. 870) (Warren 1984; Schaefer 1994; Schaefer and Laylander 2007). During the Pinto complex occupation sites within the Colorado Desert were most likely temporary, seasonal camps of small, highly mobile groups (Schaefer 1994:64; Warren 1984:414). As with the Paleoindian period, the archaeological record during the same time period is sparse, and it has been suggested that populations withdrew to the margins of the desert and/or concentrated around the few oases still present (Warren 1984:413-414). There is greater evidence for the Pinto complex recovered from the Mojave Desert, with the artifact assemblages for this period characterized by Pinto series projectile points and shaped scrapers, as well as slab metates and manos. The presence of ground stone is the greatest difference from the Paleoindian period. The Late Archaic period or Gypsum complex coincides with a period of moist climate called the Little Pluvial, with arid conditions returning in the latter half of the period. The archaeology of this period is characterized by cave sites with a wide range of diagnostic projectile points (Warren 1984:416-417). Mortars and pestles appear during this period in addition to the continued use of manos and metates. The bow and arrow was introduced at the end of this period (870 A.D.), and there was an increase in trade goods such as shell ornaments from the Pacific Coast. Recent excavations within the Coachella Valley indicate that occupation of the Colorado Desert was limited to temporary specialized camps around the Holocene Lake Cahuilla (Love and Dandul 2002:81). These shoreline sites contain the remains of fish, shellfish, and waterfowl. Sites further away from the shoreline suggest a permanent or semi- permanent occupation, with the artifact assemblage consisting of multiple occupation layers of hearths and milling implements, as well as Coso obsidian and shell beads from the Gulf of California. The obsidian and shell beads indicate exchange networks during this period. The overall reduction of size in projectile points indicates a shift from the atlatl and dart to the bow and arrow, the use of which is continued into the Late Prehistoric period. Late Prehistoric Period (A.D. 870-Historic Contact [1200 B.P.-Historic Contact]) The Late Prehistoric period within Southern California is characterized by a shift in subsistence patterns to what is known among Native American groups during the Historic period. The changes in subsistence, foraging, and land use patterns most likely reflect cultural adaptations in response to shifts in environmental conditions and influences from outside Native American groups. The greatest indicator of this period is the presence of ceramics in the archaeological record beginning ca. A.D. 870 within the Colorado Desert (Love and Dandul 2002; Schaefer and Laylander 2007:252). Brownware (primitive Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-3 October 2022 335 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES pottery) manufactured from upland clay sources and buffware (primitive pottery) from lowland sedimentary clays become increasingly common, with artifacts including clay figurines and pipes. Other indicators of the Late Prehistoric period are Cottonwood Triangular and Desert Side -Notched projectile points, a shift from extended inhumations (burials) to cremations, networks of trail systems with pot - drops and trailside shrines, and the introduction of small-scale agriculture. The networks of trails are evidence of the importance of trade, travel, and exchange throughout the Southern California deserts. Trail systems within the Colorado Desert are associated with trailside shrines, ceramic pot -drops, and rock art (Schaefer 1994:66). The subsistence and settlement patterns in the Colorado Desert were influenced by episodes of infilling and recession of the Holocene Lake Cahuilla, with the final recession around A.D. 1580 (Buckles and Krantz 2005; Laylander 1995; Waters 1983). Native populations followed the receding shoreline and continued to exploit the dwindling resources. Near the end of the Late Prehistoric period and into the Historic period, permanent villages, including the Desert Cahuilla Toro village complex of Mauulmii, were established on the valley floor and were supported by large walk-in wells and extensive mesquite groves. The Mauulimii occupied sites along the alluvial fan of Toro Canyon and settled during the recession of the lake. Historic Period The historic period of California is divided into three specific periods: the Spanish period (1769-1822), the Mexican period (1822-1848), and the American period (1848-present). The Spanish period begins with the establishment of settlements in San Diego in 1769 by the Spanish, which included the construction of the 21 missions established between 1769 and 1823 throughout California. The Mexican period begins with Mexico's independence from Spain and ends with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. The end of the Mexican -American War began the American period with California becoming a territory of the United States. During the California Gold Rush, thousands of people traveled across the Colorado River into California and through the Colorado Desert to San Jose Valley. With the influx of these gold seekers, cattle were no longer used primarily for hides, and during the cattle boom of the 1850's, rancho cowboys drove large herds from Southern California north to feed the mining and commercial boom in Northern California. American politics and the need for mild winter route to California resulted in the U.S. Gadsden Purchase of 1854, securing additional lands from Mexico. Surveys in 1857 established the current international border between Mexico and United States, stretching from New Mexico to California (Walker and Bufkin 1986). Wagon roads and railroads were constructed across the Colorado and Mojave Deserts between the 1850's and 1870's, which connected the coastal regions of California with the rest of the United States. Specifically, the Bradshaw Trail was established in 1862 as the first major east -west stagecoach and freight line road through Coachella Valley (Bean 1978:583-584). Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-4 October 2022 336 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES History of La Quinta Historic settlement of the Coachella Valley began in the 1870s with the establishment of railroad stations along the Southern Pacific Railroad. By 1883, there were stations at Banning, Beaumont, Cabazon, Whitewater (later Palm Springs Station), Seven Palms, and Indio. Settlement spread further after public land was opened for claims under the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws. The exploitation of underground water sources allowed farming to dominate the economy in the valley, but it was not until the completion of the All -American and Coachella Branch Canal in 1948-1949 that there was an adequate and reliable water source. The date palm was first introduced around the turn of the twentieth century and came to dominate the agriculture in the area. Starting in the 1920s, the resort industry began to spread through Coachella Valley, bringing resort hotels, equestrian camps, and country clubs, and eventually making the area Southern California's leading winter retreat location (Hruby et al. 2006). The origin of La Quinta is attributed largely to vacationers. The City's resort industry was born in the 1920s when Walter H. Morgan opened the La Quinta Resort and Club. The resort quickly became popular among Hollywood elite who considered the place a desert oasis. Notably, the first golf course in the Coachella Valley was built at the Resort. In 1982, the City became incorporated, adopting the resort name as the official name of the City. La Quinta was the 19t" city in Riverside County to be incorporated. Martinez Mountain Rockslide District The Martinez Mountain Rockslide District (MMRD) is located along the Martinez Rockslide landform, south of the Project property. It was determined that the MMRD has a temporal affiliation to the Late Prehistoric period that is significant for the prehistory of the region. During the Late Prehistoric period in Southern California there was a marked shift in subsistence and settlement patterns influenced by episodes of infilling and recession of the Holocene Lake Cahuilla, with the final recession around A.D. 1580. Native populations followed the receding shoreline and continued to exploit the dwindling resources. The greatest indicator of this is the presence of ceramics in archaeological sites beginning ca. A.D. 870, and the networks of trails, which demonstrate the importance of trade, travel, and exchange throughout the southern California desert. Near the end of the Late Prehistoric period and into the Historic period, permanent villages were established on the valley floor and permanent housing, which occurred at rock shelters (such as those in the MMRD). As discussed in greater detail in Section 4.5.4, Project Impact Analysis (Methodology), the Project property developmental area was reduced to avoid the MMRD and cultural resources in the southern boundary. 4.5.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-5 October 2022 337 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES National Historic Preservation Act The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (S4 USC 300101 et seq.) instituted a multifaceted program, administered by the Secretary of the Interior, to encourage sound preservation policies of the nation's cultural resources at the federal, State, and local levels. The NHPA authorized the expansion and maintenance of the National Register of Historic Place (NRHP), established the position of State Historic Preservation Officer, and provided for the designation of State Review Boards. The NHPA also set up a mechanism to certify local governments to carry out the goals of the NHPA and created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). Section 106 of the NHPA (54 USC 306108) states that federal agencies with direct or indirect jurisdiction over federally funded, assisted, or licensed undertakings must take into account the effect of the undertaking on any historic property that is included in or eligible in the NRHP. After an undertaking is identified, federal agency stakeholders shall consult by notifying the appropriate consulting parties. Consultation is between the federal agency, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), and other consulting parties including but not limited to the ACHP, certified local governments, and members of the general public with an economic, social or cultural interest in the project. National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) was established by the NHPA in 1966 as "an authoritative guide to be used by federal, State, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the Nation's cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment" (36 CFR part 60.2). The NRHP recognizes properties that are significant at the national, State, and local levels. To be eligible for listing in the NRHP, a resource must be significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of potential significance must also possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. A property is eligible for the NRHP if it is significant under one or more of the following criteria: • Criterion A: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. • Criterion B: It is associated with the lives of persons who are significant in our past. • Criterion C: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. • Criterion D: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-6 October 2022 338 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historic figures; properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes; structures that have been moved from their original locations; reconstructed historic buildings; and properties that are primarily commemorative in nature are not considered eligible for the NRHP unless they satisfy certain conditions. In general, a resource must be 50 years of age to be considered for the NRHP unless it satisfies a standard of exceptional importance. In addition to meeting these criteria, a property must retain historic integrity, which is defined in National Register Bulletin 15 as the "ability of a property to convey its significance" (National Park Service 1990). In order to assess integrity, the National Park Service recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, considered together, define historic integrity. To retain integrity, a property must possess several, if not all, of these seven qualities, which are defined in the following manner in National Register Bulletin 15: • Location: the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred; • Design: the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property; • Setting: the physical environment of a historic property; • Materials: the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property; • Workmanship: the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory; • Feeling: a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time; and/or • Association: the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. State California Register of Historical Resources Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is "an authoritative guide in California to be used by State and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the State's historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change" Public Resources Code (PRC) (Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1). Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and California Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and higher, are automatically included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical Interest program, identified as significant in historical surveys, or designated by local landmarks programs, may be nominated for inclusion in the CRHR. According to PRC Section 5024.1(c), a resource, either an individual property or a contributor to a historic district, may be listed in the CRHR if the State Historical Resources Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-7 October 2022 339 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Commission determines that it meets one or more of the following criteria, which are modeled on NRHP criteria: • Criterion 1: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. • Criterion 2: It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. • Criterion 3: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. • Criterion 4: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Resources nominated to the CRHR must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to convey the reasons for their significance. Resources whose historic integrity does not meet NRHP criteria may still be eligible for listing in the CRHR. California Environmental Quality Act CEQA also requires lead agencies to determine if a project would have a significant effect in the environment, including significant effects on historical or archaeological resources. Under CEQA Section 21084.1, a project that may cause a substantial adverse change to the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA guidelines recognize that historical resources include: • A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission for listing in, the CRHR; • A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k), or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); and • Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. Archaeological resources may be defined as a historic resource, as described above, and also as a unique archaeological resource (PRC Section 21083.2(g). Unique archaeological resources are those that meet any of the following criteria: • Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. • Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-8 October 2022 340 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES • Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. If a lead agency determines that a resource is a historical or unique archaeological resource, then the resource must be protected under CEQA. If a project may cause a substantial adverse change to the resource and avoidance is not feasible, the lead agency must identify measures to lessen the impact to less than significant levels. These criteria are addressed in Section 4.5.4 below. If resources do not meet the historical or unique archaeological resource criteria contained in the State CEQA Guidelines, the effects of a project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect to the environment and no further action would be required. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code provides guidelines prohibiting the disturbance or removal of human remains, including Native American remains or burials. Section 7050.5 specifically requires: a) Every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor, except as provided in Section 5097.99 if the Public Resources Code (PRC). b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains. c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. Regional and Local City of La Quinta Historic Preservation Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-9 October 2022 341 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES The City Council reviews nominations of certain structures, sites, and districts of historic significance and makes decisions as to which structures, sites, and/or districts within the City should be designated a Historical Resource of the City. City of La Quinta General Plan The City of La Quinta General Plan (2013), includes the following goals, policies and programs relevant to Cultural Resources that would apply to the development of the proposed Project: Cultural Resources Goals, Policies and Programs GOAL CUL-1: The protection of significant archaeological, historic and paleontological resources which occur in the City. Policy CUL-1.2: Assure that significant identified archaeological and historic resources are protected. 4.5.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The thresholds used to evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, development of the proposed Project would have a significant effect on cultural resources if it is determined that the Project would: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Methodology Historical resources include properties designated as California Historical Landmarks, Points of Historic Interest, or Riverside County Landmarks, as well as those listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), the California Historical Resources Inventory or the City's inventory. Archaeological resources are described as cultural resources and provide evidence of past human activity. They are important for scientific, historic, and/or religious reasons to cultures, communities, groups or individuals. Cultural resources are typically evaluated relative to their ability to meet any of the four criteria for the NRHP (A through D) or CRHR (1 through 4). Sites can be eligible for listing to the NRHP or CRHR either individually or as contributors to a larger archaeological district. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-10 October 2022 342 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES SWCA Environmental Consultants ("SWCA") conducted cultural resource investigations in 2004, 2005 2006, 2017, 2019, 2020 and 2021. The investigations were completed to determine whether significant cultural and historical resources are located within the Project site and update the previous cultural reports. The Project property and the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE) was modified following the 2006 and 2017 surveys (Appendix E.2). The final APE is shown in Exhibit 4.5-1, Project Area of Potential Effects, and includes a vertical APE of up to 50 feet below ground surface. The Area of Direct Impact (ADI) is smaller than the APE and comprises the areas where Project property construction and development activities may have a direct impact affect or impact to cultural resources. The total ADI comprises 557 acres of the APE and excludes the archaeological district (Martinez Mountain Rockslide District (MMRD)) and other culturally sensitive areas identified by SWCA in 2017 at the south end of the Project property. A summary of the methods and results of SWCA's investigations and findings is provided below. In February 2004, March 2005, and November 2005, SCWA conducted pedestrian surveys of 941 acres of land owned by the Project proponent and one period of limited subsurface testing of prehistoric archaeological sites in July 2005. In February and May 2006, SWCA conducted two informal surveys. This investigation included a record search, performed by Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside, on January 15, 2004. A Sacred Lands File search was initiated on December 16, 2003 and completed in September 2006. The Native American Heritage Commission responded on December 23, 2003 and stated that their search failed to indicate the presence of Native American Sacred Lands or traditional cultural properties within the immediate Project area. Based on SWCA's report, no prehistoric or historic -era resources were identified within the Project property. As part of this effort, four local Native American tribes were contacted for comment regarding their knowledge of cultural resource in the area. The Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians indicated awareness of several cultural resources in close proximity to the Project property and requested a Native American monitor be present during any ground disturbing activities. Also during 2007, a report on the status of the vineyards within the Project property was conducted. In addition, a Supplemental Cultural Resources Survey Report was prepared to evaluate the access road from the extension of Madison Street and access road from the extension of Jefferson Street. Results for both areas were negative for prehistoric and historic -era resources. As a result of the surveys, the Specific Plan Land Use Plan and other plans (circulation, infrastructure) were designed to avoid areas that were found to have cultural sensitivity. In 2019 and 2020, SCWCA conducted a survey of an additional 117 acres, including the 83-acre flood control area long CVWD Guadalupe Dike system and Jefferson Road on the north and west sides of the Project site, a 14-acre linear extension along Madison Avenue, and 20 acres along Avenue 62 east of the Project site and to a CVWD booster pump. Pursuant to BLM's recommendation, SWCA revisited certain sites that had been surveyed in 2006. The surveys consisted of 15-meter transects and a handheld global positioning system (GPS) unit capable of submeter accuracy was used to document newly identified Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-11 October 2022 343 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES resources and identify the location of previously recorded sites. Additional field surveys took place in 2019 with SWCA, accompanied by BLM's archaeologist, which was preceded by an earlier walk over of the area by SWCA and BLM's archaeologist. SWCA also reviewed the results of cultural resource studies that have been conducted within the Project property and a 0.5-mi radius, including the Project off -site utility field area. 2017 Cultural Report In 2017, SWCA revisited and updated the findings of the 2006 study that was prepared in connection with the previously approved Travertine Specific Plan. As discussed above, between 2006 and 2017, the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE) was modified and reduced from 941 acres to 877.5 acres (Appendix E.2). The 2017 investigation resulted in the identification of 29 previously recorded cultural resources located within the new APE, seven of which are located within the area of direct impacts (ADI), where Project construction and development activities will have direct potential to affect or impact cultural resources. Of the 29 resources that intersect the APE, 13 were prehistoric sites including: four ceramic scatters, one habitation site, seven bedrock milling sites, one Native American trail, and one hearth. One of the 29 resources within the APE was a historic site consisting of a single family property. Fifteen of the 29 resources within the APE were prehistoric isolates. However, the 15 isolates were considered ineligible for the NRHP and CRHR. Of the 14 previously recorded sites, nine were previously recommended eligible for the NRHP either individually (one site) or as a contributing element of an archaeological district (Martinez Mountain Rockslide District [MMRD]), three were recommended ineligible, and two were not evaluated. As part of the 2017 study, SWCA formally recorded and assessed an archaeological district MMRD. Due to the MMRD's association with the Late Prehistoric shift in subsistence and settlement patterns that is significant for the prehistory of the region, the MMRD is recommended eligible for listing to the NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1. The MMRD is also recommended eligible for listing to the NRHP under Criterion D and CRHR under Criterion 4 because it could yield data that are relevant to the prehistory of the region. SWCA contacted the NAHC requesting an SLF search as well as contact information for Native American groups or individuals that may have concerns about cultural resources in the Project APE in August 2017. The NAHC responded to the request in a letter dated August 23, 2017, that was received via email. The results of the SLF search were given to the City, which initiated SIB 18 and AB 52 compliant Native American consultation program by sending letters to each group or individual provided on the contact list by the NAHC. The letters were mailed on August 28, 2017. See Section 4.17, Tribal Cultural Resources, for discussion of the Tribal consultation. 2021 Cultural Report In 2021 SWCA prepared an Addendum to the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report (herein referred to as "Cultural Report") to capture additional alterations to the APE. From 2019 through 2021, Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-12 October 2022 344 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES the Project APE was expanded to include approximately 117 acres to the north, east, and west of 2017 APE. The current Project APE is approximately 969 acres. SWCA recorded nine newly identified resources as a result of their updated survey, for a total of seven within the APE and two within the ADI. Of the nine records identified in 2021, three were isolated finds (two prehistoric brownware sherds and one historic -era crushed, bimetal, pull -tab cans) and six were archaeological sites. The six archaeological sites consisted of three historic -era sites (refuse scatter, cans, terra-cotta sherd, milled lumber, and an automobile air filer housing), and three prehistoric sites (brownware pottery sherds and rock scatter). In addition, SWCA assessed the cultural resources sensitivity of the proposed off -site utility field that will include a IID substation and CVWD well sites within a two-mile radius of the Project property (see Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description). The assessment of the potential parcels was limited to reviewing available literature and information provided by the City of La Quinta and assessing geoarchaeological sensitivity. No formal records search or pedestrian survey was conducted for the off - site utility field. Since the 2017 report and Native American coordination conducted during the 2017 report, and as a result of the AB 52 and SB 18 consultation initiated by the City, updated Project information and cultural resources findings were provided to Michael Mirelez of the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians and Pattie Garcia -Plotkin of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians at their request. Mr. Mirelez and Ms. Garcia -Plotkin provided feedback on resource protection measures in a series of meetings with the Project applicant, the City, and SWCA on September 22, 2020. Ms. Garcia -Plotkin provided a summary of AB 52 consultation and requested resource protection measures in a letter dated September 28, 2020. This consultation and recommendations are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.17, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-13 October 2022 345 r—1 Area of PoftfiM Effmos j Addhohs to APM y'20 GEC 0 Mall n! 13Ira l Irf{v�irJ Ta m�npp'sNp am F�siga UaG5 7 -5-1—FULO a ndil 1- hJ . i Burrell or t'r Rn Atr3r � Buta�sc of•l�l:d C,f ei�j�ak#�ei i NfooLr LA Fia0wmatkin M Siz!m_ or La a o2!� os w: K F:rrnhM s ;1 •]i5 G6 ,3 in c3; Irmgery I27201 HAD 17B3U,MNra11U 1 tel M11O eadarra. 4t%M Ptw,m Kl& .DS0 Fw:&MZWCaD"f We& QW 0 4am M A.- ONSULTIN , I NC-- PROJECT AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT LaIJr,!MG}.'rVl,F-L yQ��IF�Hrlit=�i.rti1; �, I,lar, TRAVERTINE EXHIBI-Mb-1 4,5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Project Impact a & b. Adverse change in the significance of a historical resource or archaeological resource Based on the results of archaeological surveys, a total of 46 resources (27 archaeological sites and 19 isolated finds) were identified within the Project APE. Table 4.5-1 Cultural Resources Resources Find/Site Sites Status P-33-008919, P-33-008920, P-33-008921, Categorically not eligible for P-33-011347, P-33-011348, P-33-011349, listing in the NRHP and CRHR 16 Isolate P-33-011350, P-33-014851, P-33-014852, Finds P-33-014853, P-33-014856, P-33-014857, P-33-014858, P-33-014859, P-33-017754, and P-33-017756 37 Previously P-33-001334, P-33-001340, P-33-001351, Unknown eligibility/have not Recorded P-33-013296, P-33-013297, P-33-014987 been evaluated for listing in the Resources'* NRHP or CRHR P-33-001343, P-33-003875, P-33-003876, Not eligible for listing in the 21 Archaeological P-33-005319, and P-33-005321 NRHP or CRHR P-33-001331, P-33-003872, P-33-003873, 9 Recommended eligible as Sites P-33-003874, P-33-005323, P-33-014844, contributors to the MMRD, 1 P-33-014845, P-33-014846, and P-33- individually eligible for listing in 014847; P-33-014988 the NRHP or CRHR 3 Isolate Finds SWCA-ISO-44489-1006, SWCA-ISO-44489- Not eligible for listing in the 9 1010, and SWCA-44489-ISO-990 NRHP or CRHR Newly SWCA-S-44489-1000, SWCA-S-44489- Recommended not eligible for Identified 6 Archaeological 1004, SWCA-S-44489-1005, SWCA-S- listing in the NRHP or CRHR Resources' 44489-1007, SWCA-S-44489-1008, and Sites SWCA-44489-5-999 1. "Previously" refers to resources recorded during the 2006 and 2017 searches. 2. "Newly' refers to resources recorded during the 2021 report. Per the various Project Cultural Reports, of the previously recorded resources that could potentially be adversely impacted by the proposed Project, ten NRHP or CRHR eligible historical or archaeological resources (sites P-33-001331, P-33-003872, P-33-003873, P-33-003874, P-33-005323, P-33-014844, P- 33-014845, P-33-014846, P-33-014847; and P-33-014988) have been identified within the APE. However, they were located outside of the Project ADI. SWCA determined that Site P-33-014988, which included prehistoric milling slicks, is individually eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR. The remaining nine consist of prehistoric milling slicks, ceramic scatter, bedrock milling station and a habitation site, and are recommended eligible as contributors to the MMRD. SWCA concluded that the nine newly identified resources are not eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-15 October 2022 347 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES The proposed Project property avoids impacts to all identified and potentially significant archaeological sites (NHPA historic properties and CRHR historic resources) located within the APE. Specifically, the Project avoids disturbances to all historic properties and historic resources in and near the APE. The area of direct impact, which includes all areas directly affected by Project construction, completely avoids all resources that are eligible either individually or as contributors to the MMRD. These resources are located within the designated open space natural areas (Planning Area 20) and will not be developed, nor will they be affected by Project construction or operation, which allows for their long-term protection and conservation. Although the Project will avoid impacts to cultural resources, due to the sensitivity of the area the Project applicant shall be required to prepare a monitoring and mitigation program plan to implement strategies for avoiding and minimizing impacts to cultural resources. This includes providing cultural sensitivity training to construction crews, and retaining a qualified archaeologist and/or a compliance officer to implement the mitigation measures and training. Mitigation measures will also include an archaeological and/or Native American monitor during certain ground -disturbing activities. This is required by Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3 and CR-6 and CR-7. If cultural resources are exposed during excavations or other ground disturbances, work in the immediate vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the find. This is required by Mitigation Measure CR-8. Additionally, supplemental studies for areas outside the APE, including the off -site utility field (see below), are required, and all unevaluated and NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources shall be protected from direct Project impacts through avoidance mechanisms (i.e., fencing, designating environmentally sensitive areas). This is required by Mitigation Measure CR-4 and CR-5. Therefore, development of the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures. Off -Site Utility Field Although the specific locations of the off -site utilities have not yet been determined, the general area of the future wells and substation have been subject to a programmatic review conducted during SWCA's 2021 cultural resources analysis (see Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, page 3-6 of Chapter 3.0 of this Draft EIR). The programmatic review consisted of records searches and a literature review. The records search determined that 47 cultural resources were previously documented in the off -site utility field area studied by SWCA. Of the 47 resources, four sites are recommended eligible for the NRHP and CRHR. Three of the resources were recommended ineligible and the rest (40) have unknown eligibility. The literature review determined that the off -site utility field area is within the traditional territory of the Cahuilla and the contemporary boundaries of the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation. The ethnographic context of the area consisted of Indigenous villages, heavily traversed trails, settlements, and agricultural land uses. Considering the long historic record and historic -era resources in the surrounding area, it is likely some historic -era resources are present within the off -site utility field area. Furthermore, it is Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-16 October 2022 348 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES possible that historic -era archaeological resources could be preserved below the ground surface, including areas disturbed by agricultural use, although the probability is higher in undisturbed or deeply buried sediments. Specifically, there is potential to encounter structural remains, features, and artifacts associated with the historic -era agricultural or ranching use of the study area beginning in the 1870s. For these reasons, SWCA finds the potential off -site utility field area has a moderate to high sensitivity for containing historic -era archaeological resources. Considering the long historic record and large number of historic -era resources surrounding the Project area, it is likely some historic -era archaeological resources could be reserved below the ground surface, including areas disturbed by agricultural use, although the probability is higher in undisturbed or deeply buried sediments. Specifically, there is potential to encounter structural remains, features, and artifacts associated with the historic -era agricultural or ranching use of the study area beginning in the 1870s. It was determined that the off -site utility field has moderate to high sensitivity for prehistoric and historic - period archaeological resources. Agricultural development since the 1870s may reduce likelihood of encountering intact prehistoric or historic -period Native American archaeological resources within the study area since the highest potential for the presence of prehistoric and historic -period Native American archaeological material is in undisturbed (i.e., native) sediments, which occur below the plow zone. The depth of these sediments has not been confirmed for the study area. However, because of the presence of known resources, the location of the study area within the lakebed, and the likely location of the Mauulmii village complex relative to the study area, and the surrounding dense archaeological landscape, the study area appears to have a high sensitivity for prehistoric and historic -era Native American resources. Therefore, to ensure a programmatic approach to site selection that avoids previously unidentified cultural resources, the completion of a records search at the EIC, an updated Sacred Lands File search, and a pedestrian survey shall be required to confirm the presence or absence of potentially sensitive cultural resources prior to the selection of sites for the CVWD well sites and the IID substation. Additionally, outreach to local tribes to determine if tribal cultural resources may be impacted is recommended. Development should be avoided in designated areas, pursuant to the recommendations of the cultural reports. If the areas identified in the cultural reports cannot be avoided, additional archaeological testing of any known sites to determine boundaries and eligibility for listing in the CRHR and NRHP should be conducted prior to any development activities and monitoring of all ground - disturbing activities is recommended. This is required by Mitigation Measure CR-4, CR-7, and CR-8. With the implementation Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-8, outlined below, impacts to historical and or archaeological resources as a result of development of the Project and the off -site utility field will be less than significant. Moreover, the proposed distribution lines connecting the substation to other facilities and to the Project would occur within existing rights -of -way, which have already been disturbed. Therefore, the undergrounding of the distribution lines would not result in impacts to cultural resources. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-17 October 2022 349 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES C. Disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside the formal cemeteries The Project is not anticipated to disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. However, a cremation site has been recorded southeast of the Project property (not within the Project property). Therefore, pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any located other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the Riverside County Coroner has examined the remains and made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24-hours. If the Coroner's Office determines the remains are of modern origin, the appropriate law enforcement officials will be called by the Coroner and conduct the required procedures. Work will not resume until law enforcement has released the area. If the remains are determined to be archaeological in origin, the appropriate protocol is determined by whether the discovery site is located on federally or non -federally owned or managed lands. This is outlined in Mitigation Measure CR-9. If human remains are discovered on the Project site or the off -site utility field, the Project will implement Mitigation Measure CR-9, which reduces the Project's impact to less than significant levels. 4.5.5 Cumulative Impacts California's southeastern desert region has a long history of human occupation, with dates at the start of the early Holocene stretching back to ca. 10,000 years B.C. Therefore, cumulative impacts relating to cultural resources are regional in nature. Build out of the General Plan area, including lands of the proposed Project, has the potential for a substantial cumulative impact to local and regional cultural resources, as analyzed in the General Plan EIR (SCH#2010111094). Development within the Project site would likewise result in cumulatively considerable impacts to cultural resources prior to implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-9. These measures will ensure that the proposed Project would preserve sensitive resources on site, monitor and preclude or minimize impacts any sub -surface resources identified during construction, and comply with federal and State law. Development of other projects within the City and surrounding area would also have the potential to result in impacts to cultural resources. These projects will be subject to the same standard requirements for the protection of cultural resources, mitigation measures (as applicable), and will be required to comply with the same federal and State law as the proposed Project. Although continued development has the potential to cumulatively impact these resources, the continued application of City policies, General Plan policies and programs, federal and State law all will assure that cumulative impacts associated with cultural resources will be less than significant, as concluded in the General Plan EIR, at pp. III-65 through III-67. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-18 October 2022 350 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.5.6 Mitigation Measures CR-1 Prior to any ground -disturbing activities, the Project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of Interior's Standards for professional archaeology, to carry out all mitigation measures related to cultural resources. Tribal monitoring of site disturbance will also be accommodated. CR-2 The Project applicant shall assign a compliance officer for the Project to ensure mitigation measures are in place and followed for the duration of Project construction. The compliance officer should prepare a monthly compliance report for distribution to the City, BOR, BLM, and interested Native American groups. The compliance officer may be the same person as the Project archaeologist or may be another qualified individual designated by the Project applicant. CR-3 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbance, a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Monitoring Plan) shall be prepared. The Monitoring Plan shall include, but not be limited to: principles and procedures for the identification of cultural resources monitoring protocols consistent with CR-1, CR-2 and CR-7 for ground -disturbing activities, a worker training program consistent with CR-6, and discovery and processing protocols for inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources consistent with CR-7 and CR-8. The plan shall detail protocols for determining circumstances in which additional or reduced levels of monitoring (e.g., spot checking) may be appropriate. Fencing with a buffer shall be placed around resources to be avoided. The Monitoring Plan shall also establish a protocol for communicating with the lead agencies and interested Native American parties. CR-4 Prior to ground -disturbing activities in any areas outside the APE described in the Project EIR, Exhibit 4.5-1, including but not limited to locations proposed for the off -site utility field, a supplemental study including an updated records search at the EIC, updated Sacred Lands File search, and pedestrian survey, shall be conducted. If resources are identified and cannot be avoided, they shall be assessed for their eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR. Avoidance and minimization measures identified as a result of the study shall be incorporated into the Monitoring Plan. CR-5 In the event of unanticipated discovery of NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources within the APE or the off -site utility field, where operationally feasible, such resources shall be protected from direct project impacts by project redesign (i.e., relocation of the ground disturbance, ancillary facilities, or temporary facilities or work areas). Avoidance mechanisms shall include temporary fencing and designation of such areas as environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) for the duration of the proposed Project. ESAs shall include the boundary of each historic property plus a 30-meter (98-foot) buffer around the resource. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-19 October 2022 351 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES CR-6 Prior to the commencement of ground -disturbing activities, typically at the Project kick-off, the qualified archaeologist or their designee will provide cultural sensitivity training to construction crews. The training will provide information on signs of potential cultural resources, regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural resources and the proper procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources discoveries be made during construction. Workers will be provided contact information and protocols to follow if inadvertent discoveries are made. Workers will be shown examples of the types of tribal cultural resources that might be encountered and that would require notification of the project archaeologist. The Project archaeologist shall create a training video, PowerPoint presentation, or printed literature that can be shown to new workers and contractors for continuous training throughout the life of the Project. CR-7 Prior to ground disturbance, an archaeological monitor, working under the supervision of the qualified archaeologist, and Native American monitors from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, shall be retained to monitor ground -disturbing activities. Monitoring will take place within or near ESAs or in other areas agreed upon by the archaeologist, City, and Native American monitor, and as identified in the Monitoring Plan. Monitoring activities will include examining the excavation of native soils as well as the disposal of spoils in certain areas. The duration, timing and location of the monitoring shall be determined by the City in consultation with the qualified archaeologist and Native American monitors as outlined in the Monitoring Plan. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer. Additionally, fencing with a buffer shall be required around resources to be avoided. CR-8 In the event that cultural resources are exposed during excavation, work in the immediate vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the find. Ground -disturbing activities may continue in other areas. For discoveries located outside of BLM land, if the City determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis by the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is a protected resource under CEQA (Section 15064.5f; PRC 21082) additional work such as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of ground -disturbing activity in the location of discovery. For discoveries located on BLM-land, if the BLM determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis by the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is protected under Section 106 of the NHPA, additional work such as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of ground -disturbing activity in the location of discovery. Should any tribal cultural resources be encountered, additional consultation with California Native American Heritage Commission Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-20 October 2022 352 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAHC)—listed tribal groups should be conducted in coordination with the City and/or with the BLM and BOR if the discovery occurs on federal lands. CR-9 If human remains are encountered, pursuant to State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. Additional procedures for responding to the unanticipated discovery of human remains are outlined below. Modern Remains If the Coroner's Office determines the remains are of modern origin, the appropriate law enforcement officials will be called by the Coroner and conduct the required procedures. Work will not resume until law enforcement has released the area. Archaeological Remains If the remains are determined to be archaeological in origin, the appropriate protocol is determined by whether the discovery site is located on federally or non -federally owned or managed lands. Remains Discovered on Federally Owned or Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined that the remains are archaeological or historic in age, the appropriate BLM Palm Springs Field Office or BOR archaeologist must be called. The archaeologist will initiate the proper procedures under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). If the remains can be determined to be Native American, the steps as outlined in NAGPRA, 43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 10.6 Inadvertent discoveries, must be followed. Resumption of Activity: The activity that resulted in the discovery of human remains on federal lands may resume after a written, binding agreement is executed between the BLM or BOR and federally recognized affiliated Indian Tribe(s) that adopts a recovery plan for the excavation or removal of the human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony following 43 CFR Section 10.3(b)(1) of these regulations. The disposition of all human remains and NAGPRA items shall be carried out following 43 CFR 10.6. Remains Discovered on Non -Federally Owned/Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined the remains on non -federally owned or managed lands are archaeological, the Coroner will make recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the remains to the person responsible for the excavation or discovery, or to his or her authorized representative. If the Coroner believes the remains to be those of a Native American, he/she shall contact the California NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. The NAHC will notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendant (MLD) of the remains. The Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-21 October 2022 353 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES MLD has 48 hours after accessing the site of the discovery to make recommendations to the landowner for treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MILD does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does not accept the descendant's recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the NAHC. 4.5.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-9 have been prepared to ensure the protection of known and unknown cultural resources. The measures also reflect the results of AB52 consultation with the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the City. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-9 impacts to cultural resources will be reduced to less than significant, and the proposed Project will not have an adverse effect or a significant impact on cultural resources. 4.5.8 References 1. Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation for the Travertine Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, September 2006. 2. Phase I Report on Vineyard Acreage within Section 33 of the Proposed Travertine Development Project, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, June 2007. 3. Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, December 2017. 4. Addendum to Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Land Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. Travertine Draft EIR 4.5-22 October 2022 354 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.6 Energy Resources 4.6 Energy Resources 4.6.1 Introduction This section describes the existing energy resources setting, identifies the significance of the potential impacts from implementation of the proposed Project on energy resources. Information for this section was obtained from the Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis, November 2021 (Appendix H). Calculations within the project's Greenhouse Gas Analysis were provided by CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 (also included in Appendix H). Project operational energy was calculated using the recently updated CaIEEMod Version 2022.1 software and is included in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (Appendix C.2). ASupplemental Energy Memo has been included as Appendix F to outline the calculations utilized in this analysis. Additional documents relevant to the analysis of energy resources were provided by the City of La Quinta, including the La Quinta General Plan, General Plan EIR, and La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. Section 4.3, Air Quality, Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emission, Section 4.16, Transportation, and Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR provide further discussion regarding the Project's estimated energy use and infrastructure, as well as any associated environmental impacts. This portion of the Draft EIR primarily concentrates on energy consumption via electricity, natural gas, and mobility -related petroleum (gasoline and diesel fuel). 4.6.2 Existing Conditions Energy sources are made available to the City of La Quinta by private and public agencies. Major energy providers include Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). Electricity and natural gas are the primary sources of energy in the City of La Quinta. The Project property is currently vacant and is not currently served by electric or natural gas facilities. A cultivated vineyard once occupied approximately 220 acres of the Project property but has been abandoned since 2007. 4,6.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards First established by the U.S. Congress in 1975, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards reduce energy consumption by increasing the fuel economy of passenger cars and light trucks. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) jointly administerthe CAFE standards. The U.S. Congress has specified that CAFE standards must Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-1 October 2023 355 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES be set at the "maximum feasible level" with consideration given for: (1) technological feasibility; (2) economic practicality; (3) effect of other standards on fuel economy; and (4) need to conserve energy. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) was signed into law. In addition to setting increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for motor vehicles, the EISA includes other provisions related to energy efficiency: (1) Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) (Section 202); (2) Appliance and Lighting Efficiency Standard (Sections 301-325); and (3) Building Energy Efficiency (Sections 411-441). This federal legislation requires ever-increasing levels of renewable fuels to replace petroleum. State California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Climate Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs CARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources. In November 2007, CARB completed its estimates of 1990 GHG levels. Net emission 1990 levels were estimated at 427 million metric tons (MMT). Accordingly, 427 million MTCO2e equivalent was established as the emissions limit for 2020. Senate Bill 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) was enacted in 2016, a decade after AB 32. SB 32 extended the horizon year of the state's codified GHG reduction planning targets from 2020 to 2030, requiring California to reduce its GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. SB 32 allows CARB to enact further regulations to reduce emissions. Renewable Portfolio Standards Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) are policies designed to increase the use of renewable energy sources for electricity generation. These policies require or encourage electricity suppliers to provide their customers with a stated minimum share of electricity from eligible renewable resources. Established in 2002, California's RPS requires electricity providers (i.e., utilities, cooperatives, and community choice aggregators) to ensure that renewable energy constitutes a specified minimum portion of their electric load. Generation must be procured from RPS-certified facilities. The CEC verifies RPS claims. The goals of the RPS include displacing fossil fuel use, building renewable power plants, reducing GHG emissions, ensuring reliable operation of the electrical grid, and promoting customer affordability Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-2 October 2023 356 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES through stable customer rates. The RPS program has helped California reduce GHG emissions from electric power generation even as the state's population and economy have continued to grow. Senate Bill 1078, California Renewable Portfolio Standard Program Senate Bill 1078 (Pub. Util. Code § 387 et al.) established the RPS in 2002. The bill required electricity providers to increase procurement of electricity from renewable energy sources by at least one percent per year with the goal of reaching 20 percent renewables by 2017. Senate Bill 107 In 2006, Senate Bill 107 (Pub. Util. Code § 399.15 et al.) accelerated the 20 percent RPS requirement from 2017 to 2010. Senate Bill 2 In 2011, Senate Bill 2 (1X) increased the RPS to 33 percent renewables by 2020 with compliance period targets of 20 percent by 2013 and 25 percent by 2016. Senate Bill 350, Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act In 2015, Senate Bill 350 extended the RPS to 50 percent by 2030, with interim targets of 40 percent by 2024 and 45 percent by 2027. In addition, the bill requires that 65 percent of RPS procurement must be derived from long-term contracts (10 years or more) starting in 2021. Senate Bill 100, 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018 In 2018, Senate Bill 100 increases the RPS to 60 percent by 2030, with new interim targets of 44 percent by 2024 and 52 percent by 2027 as well. The bill further requires that all of the state's electricity come from carbon -free resources (not only RPS-eligible ones) by 2045. Assembly Bill 1279 (2022), The California Climate Crisis Act Senate Bill 1279 codifies the statewide carbon neutrality goal to dramatically reduce climate pollution. Approved in 2022, the legislation establishes a legally binding goal for California to achieve statewide carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and establishes an 85% emissions reduction target as part of that goal. Senate Bill 1020 (2022), Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act Approved in 2022, Senate Bill 1020 establishes a pathway toward the state's clean energy future by establishing clean electricity targets of 90% by 2035 and 95% by 2040 with the intent of advancing the state's trajectory to the existing 100% clean electricity retail sales by 2045 goal. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-3 October 2023 357 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES California Code of Regulations Title 13, Section 2449(d)(3) and 2485 The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for enforcing California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 13 Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which limit idling from both on -road and off -road diesel - powered equipment. CARB Scoping Plan Please refer to Section 4.8.3 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions) for a detailed description of CARB Scoping Plans.. CCR Title 24 Located in CCR Title 24, Part 6 and commonly referred to as "Title 24", these energy efficiency standards were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The goal of Title 24 energy standards is the reduction of energy use. In August 2021, the CEC adopted the 2022 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. This code encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric -ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation standards, and more. Title 24 also includes Part 11, known as California's Green Building Standards (CALGreen). The CALGreen standard took effect in January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up new construction of commercial, low-rise residential, and State-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. California Solar Mandate In 2018, California created a mandate that new single family homes and multifamily dwellings up to three stories high, must install solar panels. The California Solar Mandate took effect on January 1, 2020, and is part of California's Title 24 building codes. In 2023, the California Energy Commission released new requirements associated with the California Solar Mandate, which includes new requirements for solar PV, battery storage, and EV charging to encourage the installation of onsite clean energy for new buildings. State Vehicle Standards The CARB Advanced Clean Cars program for passenger vehicles and light trucks serves to reduce petroleum consumption by increasing the operating efficiencies of vehicles and accelerating the penetration of plug-in hybrid and zero -emission vehicles in California. While such regulations primarily are adopted to reduce air pollution, co -benefits in the form of reduced petroleum consumption are common. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-4 October 2023 358 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Executive Order S-03-05 On June 1, 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-03-05, requiring the Secretary of the California EPA to report to the Governor and the state legislature by January 2006, and every two years afterward, on the impacts to global warming to California. Executive Order B-30-15 In April 2015, Governor Edmund Gerald Brown signed Executive Order (EO) B-30-15 establishing a new interim greenhouse gas reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels and directing state agencies to take additional actions to prepare for the impacts of climate change. The EO requires consideration of climate change impacts in the State's Infrastructure Investment Plan and in all state planning and investment decisions. The EO also sets principles for the states action to address climate impacts and calls for monitoring of State progress. Executive Order B-55-18 Executive Order B-55-18 was signed in 2018 and commits the State to achieving a just and equitable transition to carbon neutrality by 2045. Achieving EO B-55-18 requires both significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, including sequestration in forests, soils, and other natural landscapes. Executive Order N-79-20 In September 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-79-20 setting a State goal that 100 percent of in -state sales of new passenger cars and trucks will be zero -emission by 2035. EO N-79-20 also sets the goal of 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero - emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks California Energy Commission The California Energy Commission (CEC) is the State's primary energy policy and planning agency and plays a critical role in implementing and creating policies and programs to create a low -carbon economy. According to the CEC's Energy Consumption Database, the State of California consumed approximately 279,510 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity in the most recent available year, 2020. Electricity demand in California is projected to rise to approximately 354,209 GWh (high energy demand) in 2030. The State produces approximately 82 percent of its electricity and imports the remaining 18 percent. The California Independent System Operator (ISO) governs the transmission of electricity from power plants to utilities. Regional and Local Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-5 October 2023 359 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Imperial Irrigation District IID is the sixth largest electrical utility in California, serving more than 150,000 customers. The IID energy service territory covers 6,471 square miles, including all of Imperial County along with parts of Riverside and San Diego counties. According to the CEC Energy Consumption Database, approximately 3,678.6 GWh were consumed in IID's service area in 2020. IID provides residents and businesses in its service area with various assistance and renewable energy programs. Imperial Irrigation District 2018 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) The IRP identifies IID's resource portfolio at least through 2030 and beginning in 2018 and, pursuant to state law, addresses the best of mix of resources, IID's compliance with the RPS and emissions laws, and operational flexibility and effectiveness in renewable integration, among other topics. The IRP addresses IID's objectives to create supply plan solutions that meet current and future customer needs, create a system stability and reliability plan that ensures greater grid resilience, creates a renewable energy and emissions reductions plan, and creates an energy efficiency plan. With respect to energy efficiency, the IRP sets forth various goals, including implementing energy efficiency programs necessary to reduce load by at least 5 percent by 2020, adjust this goal annually as necessary to comply with state law, provide positive impact on utility cost by stabilizing energy consumption and reducing purchases of expensive peak power, ensuring the program portfolio is cost effective, assist residential developers to meet the title 24 "zero net energy" standards, and provide customers the opportunity to improve the environment by conserving energy and/or acquiring renewable energy, and increasing the awareness of energy efficiency and utilization through effective promotion of programs and energy issues and providing a forum for customer adoption of energy effective habits through energy education. The IRP also identifies the need to adopt energy efficiency targets consistent with State law. IID Green Energy Rate Program IID has developed a new Green Energy Rate Program that allows customers to designate how much renewable energy they will utilize. In 2018, IID planned to serve its customers with 35 percent renewable energy. Customers who elect participation in the new Green Energy Rate Program, can choose to be served with an even greater percentage of renewables, up to 100 percent. For participants, it is estimated to increase customers' per kilowatt-hour rate by $0.013 to $0.02. The monthly rate will fluctuate based on IID's cost to procure renewable resources. The program is open to all electric customers, with an exception for customers who have installed on - site renewable systems or wholesale power customers receiving standby service. The district has allocated 5 megawatts in the initial offering of the program; however, additional megawatts may be added if customer demand warrants an increase. IID has invested millions of dollars in incentives to help customers take part in its renewable energy programs, including issuing rebates, Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-6 October 2023 360 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES weathering homes, tuning -up AC units and offering savings on energy and excess power sold to IID through net metering and net billing programs. Residential Energy Assistance Program IID's Residential Assistance Program provides income -qualifying customers with a 20 percent discount on their electric bill. IID also offers a 30 percent REAP discount to qualifying customers age 62 or older. Participants who are 62 or older need to reapply for REAP every two years, while all other participants must reapply annually. eGreen Program The eGreen Program was customized to bring renewable solar clean energy to low-income families without the need for on -site installation. No enrollment is required. REAP customers will automatically be enrolled in IID's eGreen program. The eGreen program provides up to 5 percent additional discount to REAP customers' monthly electric bills. Emergency Energy Assistance Program IID's Emergency Energy Assistance Program (EEAP) was established to assist customers who face disconnection for non-payment. EEAP payment assistance is available quarterly to those who participate in the REAP program, and customers may qualify for up to $75 off their electric bill during the 1st and 41n quarter, and up to $125 during the 2nd and V quarter. Energy Consumers Advisory Committee IID's Energy Consumers Advisory Committee (ECAC) was established in 1994 and provides advice and recommendations to the IID Board or Directors regarding fiscal, strategic planning, and Board policy matters that affect the Energy Department. Since the time of its inception, the ECAC has acted in an advisory capacity to the Board recommending actions on a variety of topics, including budget needs, capital expenditures and pilot program needs. The committee was recently reconstituted and is now comprised of 20 representatives. In the Imperial Valley, each director is responsible for the selection of two appointees for his or her division — totaling 10 representatives. The Coachella Valley is also represented by 10 members; however, they are nominated by the cities and the County of Riverside. Indio, La Quinta, and Coachella are allowed two nominations each, while Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage share a delegate. The unincorporated areas are served by three representatives nominated by the county. After nomination, each representative is then ratified by the IID board. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-7 October 2023 361 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan In 2012, as part of the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) Update, a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan was prepared. The inventory established a baseline year of 2005, then projected future year emissions based on 2005 emission levels. The reduction targets identified in the Plan are consistent with AB 32 and the goal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (CO2e) to 10 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The communitywide GHG trend under business -as -usual conditions for the 2005 baseline level is 460,946 metric tons of CO2e, the 2020 reduction target of 414,852 metric tons of CO2e, and the 2035 reduction target of 331,881 metric tons of CO2e. La Quinta Municipal Code Similar to the GHG Reduction Plan and the 2035 LQGP, the City's Municipal Code also includes provisions that encourage the use of alternative transportation means that reduce the use of non-renewable energy and the use of energy efficient appliances and building design standards. The following list includes some of these provisions: • Section 8.14.010, Adoption of the California Energy Code requires that new development implement energy efficiency building practices. • Chapter 9.180, Transportation Demand Management, which is intended to protect the public health, safety and welfare by reducing air pollution, traffic congestion and energy consumption attributable to vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. La Quinta General Plan The City of La Quinta is committed to reducing energy demand and consumption within the City. According to the Livable Community Element in the 2035 La Quinta General Plan (LQGP). Reducing energy consumption will contribute to reducing the amount of air pollutants and greenhouse gases generated by the production of electricity and natural gas. In order to reduce energy consumption in the City, the LQGP outlines various goals, policies and programs for energy efficient buildings within their City. Energy efficiency is emphasized in the Circulation, Sustainable Community, Air Quality and Energy Elements in the LQGP. Electricity According to the LQGP Environmental Impact Report (EIR), buildout of residential and commercial uses in the GP area will result in electrical consumption of approximately 1,088,371,637.12 kiloWatt hours (kWh) per year. Residential uses will account for 530,867,194 kWh/year of this amount, while commercial uses will consume 557,504,443.12 kWh/year. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-8 October 2023 362 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Natural Gas According to the LQGP EIR, at City build -out, residential units will use approximately 919,426,079 cubic feet (cf) of natural gas per year (cf/year), and commercial uses will consume approximately 512,618,978.28 cf/year. At buildout, all development in the residential and commercial land uses within the City's General Plan Planning Area is expected to consume approximately 1,432,045,057.28 cf/year at buildout. Alternative Energy The City's abundant sunshine makes solar energy use the most promising alternative energy production method for the future. In the past, consumer -level solar energy systems were costly. During the life of the GP, it can be expected that solar energy use for residences and businesses will increase substantially. PPtrn1Piim According to the Livable Community chapter of the LQGP, emissions from automobiles are the single largest contributor to the City's air pollution. As the City works toward being more self-sustaining, protecting its air quality must be considered. The City's GHG Reduction Plan includes a number of strategies to reduce the amount of air emissions from motor vehicles, all of which are designed to help to reduce emissions. Examples include: - The replacement of City and private gasoline vehicles with electric vehicles. - Synchronizing traffic signals to improve traffic flow and reduce idling. - Expanding multiuse paths and golf cart routes. A large part of the effort toward reducing petroleum consumption involves enabling alternative modes of transportation (such as trails for pedestrians and bicyclists, golf cart and Neighborhood Electric Vehicles), enhancing access to public transit, and improving connections between residences and these alternative modes of transportation. Alternative modes of transportation also include ride -sharing, carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, and using hybrid or electric vehicles. 4.6.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following thresholds or criteria are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effect. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, development of the project would have a significant effect on energy resources if it is determined that the project will: a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-9 October 2023 363 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Methodology The analysis in this section relies on the energy calculations conducted to prepare the Project -specific Greenhouse Gas Analysis (referred to as "GHG Analysis" herein) and the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) Version 2016.3.2 Modeling Data and 2022.1, provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in conjunction with other California air districts, including SCAQMD, released the latest version of the CaIEEMod Version 2022.1 in May 2022. The Urban Crossroads, Inc. AQ and GHG Assessment Memorandum ("AQ and GHG Memo") is attached as Appendix H of this Draft EIR. CaIEEMod is a Statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from land use projects. In order to calculate the Project's energy demand, Urban Crossroads ran multiple CaIEEMod models which included: (1) Annual Construction Emissions and (2) Proposed Project Operational Emissions. Full buildout of the Project will include 758 single family detached residential homes, 442 duplex residential units, a 100-room resort hotel, and other resort/golf facilities. The resort/golf facilities would consist of golf practice (4-holes) and driving range, golf academy, banquet facility and restaurant, and passive outdoor use on slopes. Per the GHG Analysis, the anticipated physical construction phase completion dates area as follows: • Phase 1: 2026 • Phase 2: 2029 • Phase 3: 2031 In addition to the 855-acre development, the Project proposes an off -site utility field for the development of five domestic water wells to be owned and operated by CVWD and a 2.5-acre electric power substation to be owned and operated by IID, which was factored into the Project energy demand analysis. Project -related construction activities were categorized in the Project -specific GHG Analysis to include: • Phase A Grading Activities — Crushing; Madison EVA with Water Line; Grading and Tank Construction; Avenue 62 with Water Line. • Water Well Construction — Site Preparation; Trenching; Building Construction. • Substation Construction — Demolition; Grading; Building Construction. • Phase B Grading Activities — Crushing; Grading; Jefferson with Water Line. • Physical Construction — Site Preparation; Grading; Building Construction; Paving; Architectural Coating. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-10 October 2023 364 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Fuel consumption by construction equipment was calculated based on the equipment mix and usage factors provided in the CalEEMod construction output files. Fuel consumption from construction worker and vendor trucks was calculated using the trip rates and distances provided in the CalEEMod construction output files. Total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were then calculated for each type of construction -related trip and divided by the corresponding miles per gallon emissions factor using the USEPA's Greenhouse Gas Equivalency Calculator. The Proposed Project Operational model is based on total Project buildout. Annual consumption of electricity and natural gas was calculated using demand factors provided in CalEEMod as part of the GHG Report, is included as Appendix H and is discussed in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Draft EIR. Daily Trip Generation and vehicle miles traveled used in the analysis were also based on the inputs from the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, also prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix M.1). Based on the VMT calculations, gasoline and diesel consumption rates were estimated for Project operation. Project -related energy consumption, via electricity, natural gas, and petroleum - based fuels, is analyzed below in the discussion of Project impacts. Supplemental tables and a summary of the formulas utilized to determine Project -related petroleum consumption is included as Appendix F of this Draft EIR (see "Supplemental Energy Memo") The analysis of the significance of the Project's energy demand was also informed by the factors identified in Appendix F (Energy Conservation) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, and as relevant to this Project, Appendix F recommends the following energy topics be analyzed in the EIR: - The project's energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for each stage of the project including construction, operation, and maintenance. See following Greenhouse Gas Analysis subheading and Appendix F, Supplemental Energy Memo. - The effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies and on requirements for additional capacity. - The degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards. - The effects of the project on energy resources. - The project's projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient transportation alternatives. Project Impacts a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation As discussed under heading 4.6.2, Existing Conditions the Project property is currently undeveloped, although it once had an electric power distribution line that powered an on -site well during the period Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-11 October 2023 365 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES of vine cultivation. Electricity and natural gas will be provided to the project site by Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and the Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company or SoCalGas), respectively. Construction Energy Impacts During construction of the proposed Project, energy resources would be consumed in the form of electricity, provided by IID, and fossil fuels. Electricity consumed is associated with the conveyance of water used for dust control, lights, electronic equipment, or other construction equipment necessitating line -source and dedicated sources of electrical power. Fossil fuel consumption is associated with the wide variety of construction equipment to be used on the Project site, including construction worker travel and materials removal and delivery. Construction activities, including new buildings and facilities, typically do not involve the consumption of natural gas. Electricity During grading and construction, the Project's electricity demand will be limited. Energy used to pump water, power security and other lighting, and for incidental purposes, will result in electricity consumption during grading and construction. A total of approximately 191,088.1 kWh of electricity is anticipated to be consumed during construction (GHG Report, Appendix H, and Supplemental Energy Memo, Appendix F). This estimate is based on the water for dust control and soils preparation and compaction, based on total days of grading, acreage disturbed, daily water usage factors and supply water electricity intensity factor. See Table 1, Summary of Electricity Use During Construction, in Appendix F, which estimates electricity consumed during each phase of construction, based on CalEEMod outputs. The electricity demand at any given time would vary throughout the construction period based on construction activities being performed. When not in use, electric equipment would be powered off so as to avoid unnecessary energy consumption. Once construction activities are complete, electricity demand will transition to operational power demand. The estimated construction -related electricity usage represents approximately 1.71 percent of the Project's estimated annual operational demand, as discussed below. IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's planning area will be approximately 4,641,267 MWh annually by 2031. Based on the Project's estimated electrical demand of 191,088.1 kWh over the course of nine years of Project construction, the Project construction would cumulatively account for less than approximately 0.004 percent of IID's total estimated demand in 2031. Natural Gas Natural gas will not be used during construction of the Project. Fuels used for construction would primarily consist of petroleum distillates, including diesel and gasoline fuels, which are discussed below. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-12 October 2023 366 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Transportation Energy Fossil fuels used by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction, while travel associated with the transportation of construction materials and construction worker commutes would also result in fossil fuel consumption. Heavy-duty construction equipment would rely on diesel fuel. It is assumed that construction workers would travel to and from the Project property in gasoline -powered passenger vehicles. Fossil fuel consumption from construction equipment was estimated by converting the total CO2 emissions from each construction phase (i.e., site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating) to gallons using the conversion factors discussed above. Construction Worker Gasoline Demand: The demand of gasoline for construction worker trips to and from the Project site during construction of the proposed on- and off -site facilities would result in a total demand of 147,652.6 gallons of gasoline (see Table 2, Construction Worker Gasoline Demand, in Appendix F). Construction Vendor Diesel Demand: The demand of diesel fuel for construction vendor trips to and from the Project site are associated with the delivery of construction materials during the building construction phase. Construction vendors are estimated to consume 55,129.1 gallons of diesel fuel during Project construction of on- and off -site development (as defined in the GHG Analysis) (see Table 3, Construction Vendor Diesel Fuel Demand, in Appendix F). Construction Eauh3ment Diesel Demand: The demand of diesel fuel for construction vehicles on -site during the various construction phases is expected to consume 2,908,105.7 gallons of diesel fuel during all construction phases and approximately nine years of development (as defined in the GHG Analysis) (see Table 4, Construction Equipment Diesel Fuel Demand, in Appendix F). Construction Gasoline and Diesel Demand Conclusion: Overall, the Project is estimated to consume approximately 147,652.6 gallons of gasoline and 2,963,234.8 gallons of diesel fuel during Project construction. In total, the Project will consume 3,110,887.4 gallons of petroleum -based fuels during Project construction between years 2023 and 2032, assuming Project buildout. Petroleum fuel use is necessary to operate construction equipment. See Appendix F for calculations and tables utilized in this analysis. The US EPA applied a Tier 4 program will be applied to and required of Project construction equipment rated at 50 horsepower or greater. The US EPA Tier 4 program helps reduce the impacts of vehicles on air quality by requiring engines to reduce both tailpipe and evaporative emissions (specifically NOx and PM) from off -road equipment including construction vehicles prior to 2015, when the Tier 4 standards were phased in. Technology advancements in exhaust design to reduce off -road equipment emissions have also resulted in more efficient conversion of fuel to energy. The use of Tier 4 off -road equipment helps equipment owners reduce fuel use to control costs, as well as conserve energy resources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve air quality. The use of Tier 4 engines or higher during Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-13 October 2023 367 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Project construction would assist in reducing construction -related gasoline consumption at the Project site. This is required in Mitigation Measure AQ-1 during Project and off -site utility construction activities. See Section 4.3, Air Quality, for further discussion. Operational Energy Impacts Electricity The CaIEEMod air quality model used for the GHG Analysis for the Project and additional analysis calculated the Project's potential operational demand for electricity, its electrical load, by dividing the land uses into distinct categories. The categories, consistent with the proposed Project, include low-rise apartments, golf course, hotel, single family housing, and other asphalt surfaces(i.e., long driveways, sports courts, etc.). The other asphalt surfaces land use does not include parking lots. Definitions of and default demand values used for these land uses are provided in the CaIEEMod manual. According to the Project's CaIEEMod calculations, provided in the GHG Analysis, the Project is expected to generate an annual demand for approximately 11,144,490 kWh at build -out accounting for energy - reducing project design features described below (see Table 5 in Appendix F of this Draft EIR). The proposed Project would incorporate several project design features (PDFs) directed at minimizing energy use, such as the implementation of a Project -specific Water Conservation Strategy to reduce water demands and associated energy use. In addition to the PDFs, the Project will also be required to implement standards required by the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 of CCR), and Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20 of CCR). These standards require high efficiency lighting, applying energy efficient design building shells and building components, such as windows, roof systems, electrical lighting systems, and heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems to meet Building Code standards in effect at the time development occurs. Title 24 standards also require solar systems for new homes. The project would also install water -efficient plumbing fixtures and irrigation systems, LED technology, drought -tolerant plants in landscaping. The project design features would result in reduced electricity consumption. The LQGP EIR predicts that buildout of residential and commercial uses in the General Plan, including the proposed Project property, will result in electrical consumption of 1,088,371,637.12 kWh per year. Residential uses will account for 530,867,194 kWh/year of this amount, while commercial uses will consume 557,504,443.12 kWh/year. As indicated in the table below, the proposed Project is anticipated to consume approximately 12,987,903 kWh/year, which is approximately 1.2 percent of the City's electrical consumption at total build -out. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-14 October 2023 368 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Table 4.6-1 Project Electricity Demand Land Use Electricity Use kWh/yr Apartments Low Rise 3,026,281 Hotel 2,882,475 Golf Course 0 Single Family Housing 7,079,147 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 Total Demand (kWh/yr) 12,987,903 See Table 5 in Supplemental Energy Memo, Appendix F The IID delivered approximately 3,678.63 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity to its service area in 2020. IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's service area will be approximately 4,641.27 GWh annually by 2031. Based on the proposed Project's estimated annual electrical demand of 12,987,903 kWh (or 12.9879 GWh), the Project would account for approximately 0.28 percent of IID's total estimated demand in 2031. In addition to the listed project design features, the Project is required to contribute to the development of off -site CVWD water wells and contribute to the development of an IID electric power substation within an off -site utility field. The future substation will extend 16 kV distribution lines to the site. All distribution facilities will operate as underground conduit systems located within existing rights -of -way which have been previously disturbed. The construction of the off -site electrical substation will occur during Phase I of the development and will serve the Project and future development in south La Quinta. Although the Project would develop a substation, IID analyzed and anticipates growth within its service area including the increase in demand proposed by the Project. Project electricity use will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources because the Project residents will benefit from IID's energy efficiency programs, energy codes established by the state and implemented by IID will be applied to the Project and all future development to reduce unit energy consumption and increase energy use efficiency. These energy use reduction features include the project design features listed in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. Additionally, IID continues to invest in alternative and renewable energy sources and storage. While the Project would result in a long-term increase in demand for electricity, the Project would be required to comply with Title 24 and CALGreen requirements related to energy efficiency. Compliance with energy efficiency codes and regulations will be required during the operation of the Project. With Title 24's new California Solar Mandate taking effect in 2023, the Project will also be implementing rooftop solar, battery storage and energy -efficient design features to generate and store electricity onsite, and reduce electricity consumption. Impacts will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-15 October 2023 369 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Natural Gas According to the La Quinta General Plan, household demand for natural gas is approximately 29,093 cubic feet per year. This number is equivalent to approximately 30,169.4 thousand British Thermal Units (BTU), which is the energy unit used in the CaIEEMod calculations. Therefore, the existing approximately 24,764 households in the City would consume approximately 720,459,052 cubic feet per year (equivalent to 708,649,999.65 kBTU). The residential component of the City is responsible for approximately 70 percent of the City's total natural gas consumption. Project operations natural gas consumption will be primarily from building space heating, water heating, and cooking. Project natural gas consumption was calculated using CalEEMod default values for the low- rise apartments, hotel, and single-family housing components of the Project. Based on the CaIEEMod calculations, at buildout the Project is estimated to consume approximately 41,923,277.7 cubic feet or 43,474,439 kBTU of natural gas annually (see Table 6 in Appendix F of this Draft EIR). According to the LQGP EIR, at General Plan build -out, the aggregate of City residential units will use approximately 919,426,079 cubic feet of natural gas per year (cf/year). For City-wide commercial uses, consumption will be approximately 512,618,978.28 cf/year. At buildout, all combined City land uses are expected to consume approximately 1,432,045,057.28 cubic feet per year. This number is equivalent to 1,485,030,724.4 kBTU. According to the GHG Analysis prepared for the subject Project, the Project is anticipated to consume approximately 43,474,439 kBTU/year, which is approximately 2.9 percent of the City's natural gas consumption at buildout of the City. Based on the 2018 California Gas Report, the California Gas and Electric Utility providers in the State estimate natural gas consumption within SoCalGas's planning area will be approximately 2,310 million cf per day in 2030. The Project would consume approximately 0.0034 percent of the 2030 forecasted consumption in SoCalGas's planning area. Although the Project would result in a long-term increase in demand for natural gas, the Project would be designed to comply with Title 24, Part 6 of the CCR regarding energy consumption. As a part of the project design features to reduce energy consumption, the Project will install appliances with the highest energy efficiency practicable. The implementation of the project design features listed throughout this Energy Resources section and Chapter 3.0, Project Description, will be included as an enforceable provision in the Development Agreement, and will reduce the amount of natural gas consumed during project operation. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant without mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant. Transportation Energy The post -construction consumption and use of petroleum -based fuels for Project -related vehicular travel are anticipated during operation of the Project. The VMT Evaluation calculated that the project will generate approximately 19,678,062.5 annual vehicle miles traveled (VMTs). See Table 8, Proposed Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-16 October 2023 370 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Project Operational Annual Petroleum, in Appendix F of this Draft EIR. Annual petroleum demand for the project would consume approximately 1,267,716.5 gallons of gasoline, and 90,250.5 gallons of diesel. Cumulatively, the Project would consume approximately 1,357,967 gallons of petroleum -based fuels each year. However, the petroleum consumed by Project vehicles is conservative, since CaIEEMod does not analyze the phasing -out of gas -powered vehicles pursuant to state law. Thus, it is likely that some of the vehicles associated with the Project would not be gas -powered. The Specific Plan Amendment proposes alternative forms of transportation while providing for vehicular access through a roadway network that interconnects all land uses within the Project property. The circulation and trail system proposed for the Project will decrease automobile dependency by for a variety of user groups including motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers of low -speed electric vehicles. Additionally, access and parking in proximity to resort areas for visitors is incorporated into Project design. The internal system of private local roadways will allow residents of individual neighborhoods to access all Planning Areas internally without exiting onto surrounding public streets. The Project proposes a Community Grand Loop Trail, Strolling Trail, Interconnector Trail, Class II Bike Trail, and pedestrian and Multi -Use Paths and streets, which will comply with Chapter 9.180, Transportation Demand Management, of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Providing hiking and biking trails within the Project will allow guests and residents to use other, less energy intensive forms of transportation, lowering vehicle miles traveled created by the Project. Additionally, the development of different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter any may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport. In addition, operation of the Project would introduce employment opportunities to southern La Quinta and surrounding areas, potentially resulting in shorter home to work trips within the SCAG planning area. Per the Project -specific VMT Analysis, Project employment would slightly decrease the total VMT in the Coachella Valley area from 15,173,739 to 15,172,507. When a project provides a mix of uses that provides additional opportunities for nearby (and project) residents to work, recreate, etc., the non- residential VMT for an area can decrease. Additional new jobs in an area work to reduce the regional VMT, thus potentially reducing vehicle trips. Moreover, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) require increased vehicle fuel efficiency standards to reduce vehicle emissions. Increased fuel efficiency also means that less fuel is required per mile traveled. Although the Project will result in a direct increase in VMTs, the Project will not interfere with increased fuel efficiency standards and will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of transportation energy resources during operation. Impacts will be less than significant. b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-17 October 2023 371 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES The proposed Project's consistency with relevant State and local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency is provided below. EPA/CARB Tier 4 Emissions Standards The US EPA implements a Tier 4 program in order to reduce the impacts of motor vehicles emissions on air quality and public health. These vehicle emissions standards reduce both tailpipe and evaporative emissions from passenger cars, light -duty trucks, medium duty passenger vehicles, and some heavy-duty vehicles. As stated in Section 4.3, Air Quality, and in discussion a.) of this Energy Resources section, the Project is required to operate off -road diesel construction equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater in compliance with EPA/CARB Tier 4 off -road emissions standards or equivalent, during all construction activities. This is identified as Mitigation Measure AQ-1. The use of Tier 4 engines or higher during Project construction would assist in reducing construction -related emissions at the Project site and off -site utility field. The Project will not conflict or obstruct the EPA/CARB Tier 4 emissions standards. Title 24 Title 24's Building Energy Efficiency Standards are designed to reduce wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings. Title 24 also includes Part 11, known as California's Green Building Standards (CALGreen), which instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up new construction of commercial, low-rise residential, and State-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. The Project will be required to meet or exceed the standards of Title 24, consistent with the City's adoption of that Code. In addition, the proposed Project will require efficient lighting and other electrical technology within homes and other uses, to reduce energy consumption. The Project will also install water -efficient plumbing fixtures, water -efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls for common area landscape irrigation, and use drought -tolerant plants in landscape design, as well as install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, Energy Star appliances, and tankless water heaters. The conformance with Title 24 and installation and use of these fixtures will reduce wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption for the proposed Project compared to its development prior to the implementation of Title 24. CARB 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future regulatory requirements promulgated through the 2022 Scoping Plan. The Project will comply with some of the current transportation sector policies (through vehicle manufacturer compliance), including: Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Zero Emission Forklifts, the Off -Road Zero - Emission Targeted Manufacturer rule, Clean Off -Road Fleet Recognition Program, In -use Off -Road Diesel -Fueled Fleets Regulation, Off -Road Zero -Emission Targeted Manufacturer rule, Clean Off -Road Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-18 October 2023 372 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Fleet Recognition Program, Amendments to the In -use Off -Road Diesel -Fueled Fleets Regulation, carbon pricing through the Cap -and -Trade Program, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Further, the Project will include design features related to water conservation. Lastly, the Project would be required to comply with applicable elements outlined in the County's CAP. As such, the Project would not obstruct the any State plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan The LQGP and GHG Reduction Plan also outlines measures to reduce energy consumed by existing and future developments within the City. Per the GHG Reduction Plan, new development can reduce energy demand through design, orientation, and use of sustainable materials. Community Implementation (CI) measures are those specific to existing development and include encouraging rooftop solar (CI-1), promoting community involvement (CI-3), and encouraging use of energy efficient appliances and fixtures (CI-4). New Development (ND) implementation is specific to new residential and commercial projects. ND-1 encourages and promotes all new development to achieve energy efficiency and incorporate sustainable design principles that exceed Green Building Code requirements. This measure requires compliance with CBC Title 24, including the use of energy efficient and Energy Star rated appliances for new buildings; the use of high efficiency water fixtures (toilets, water heaters, and faucets) in all new buildings; and limiting turf in landscaped areas. This is required in Mitigation Measure GHG-6 and GHG-11, discussed above and below. ND-2 works towards carbon neutrality for new buildings through design measures, onsite renewables, and offsets. Carbon neutral buildings achieve a net zero emission of GHGs through design measures, onsite renewable, and offsets. ND-2 sets the goal of achieving carbon neutrality for a minimum of 525,000 square feet of new commercial development by 2020, and an additional 230,000 square feet for new development between 2020 and 2035. Along with the measures listed above, additional measures include electric -ready circuits for space heating, water heating, cooking/ovens, and clothes dryers; electric vehicle charging parking in non-residential components; drought tolerant landscaping; and high efficiency HVAC systems. These measures are also required as Mitigation Measure GHG-2, GHG-3, GHG-4 and GHG-9. The LQGP contemplates 31,603 total residential units, and 9,632,074 square feet of commercial development through 2035 and the Project contributes 3.8 percent of the residential unit count and 1.74 percent of the commercial square footage. Accordingly, while the Project does not itself achieve carbon neutrality, it has to the degree feasible reduced GHG emissions through on -site and off -site measures, consistent with ND-2, and does not impede the City's carbon neutrality goals. ND-3 encourages all new development to meet 50 percent of energy demand through onsite solar or other non-polluting sources. As discussed above, the Project's electricity demand is anticipated to be supplied by IID. IID's Integrated Resource Plan provides that 45 percent of IID's resource portfolio will be supplied by renewable energy by 2027 and that 50 percent of IID's resource portfolio will be supplied by renewable energy by 2030. In accordance with the 2022 Title 24 standards, the Project shall be required to install solar photovoltaic systems for newly constructed homes. Although this is required by Title 24, it is also required in the Specific Plan Amendment (see Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-19 October 2023 373 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Chapter 6, pg. 6-2) and by Mitigation Measures GHG-2, -3, -4 and -9 (see Section 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions). Accordingly, the Project is consistent with ND-3. La Quinta General Plan Natural Resources Element Since the Project property is located within the City of La Quinta, local energy efficiency standards within Chapter III, Natural Resources, of the LQGP are applicable. The Natural Resources Chapter summarizes the key General Plan policies that support the City's goals for wise energy use. As previously discussed, the Project will use alternative forms of energy (i.e., solar photovoltaic panels on residential homes), as required by Title 24, as well as developing a Water Reduction Strategy to reduce Project water use and associated energy consumption, as included in the PDFs and Mitigation Measure GHG-2 and GHG-9. With the implementation of the PDFs and GHG-2 and -9, which will be made enforceable by the City and State (Title 24) requirements, the Project is compliant with Policy EM-1.1 of the Natural Resources Element of the LQGP, which requires the sustainable use and management of energy resources, as well as Policy EM-1.2, which supports the use of alternative energy, and its associated programs. Circulation Element As previously stated in discussion a), the Project would implement measures required under the LQGP Policy CIR-1.12 and Policy CIR-2.2. Policy CIR-1.12 encourages development of land use patterns that maximize interactions between adjacent and nearby land uses. New development must provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent streets and assure that infrastructure and amenities accommodate pedestrian and bicycle use. As previously stated, the Project will implement short-term bicycle parking, long-term bicycle parking, designated parking for clean air/fuel efficient vehicles, and EV charging stations as required by CALGreen in non-residential areas. Finally, the Project will implement mixed land uses which decrease VMTs (since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport), as well as sidewalk connections, trail networks, and bike paths throughout the property to promote pedestrian access and interconnectivity. Thus, the Project is consistent with Policy CIR-1.12 and CIR-2.2 of the Circulation Element of the LQGP. Livable Community Element The Livable Community Element of the General Plan outlines policies and programs to reduce energy consumption in the City. Policy SC-1.5 states all new development shall include resource efficient development principles, in which construction of new buildings incorporate recycled materials, high efficiency windows, alternative energy, and other techniques to reduce the impact of natural resources on the buildings and make them more self-sustaining. Resource efficient developments in the City of La Quinta typically utilize passive and active solar design. Passive solar design relies on the design and placement of a building to take advantage of the sun, while active solar design use renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, to produce power and reduce energy consumption. Resource efficient Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-20 October 2023 374 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES building design is also achieved through the compliance of CALGreen Building Codes, Title 24 (Program SC-1.5.a), encouraging vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle connection through the City (Program SC-1.5.c), and encouraging mixed -use projects to interconnect public spaces consistent with resource efficient design principles (Program SC-1.5.d). For reasons stated, the project will comply with CALGreen Building Codes and Title 24 codes and standards for both residential and nonresidential components of the project. Additionally, the Project proposes resource efficient building design by implementing the following: • The installation of green roofs and solar panels on buildings within the community (SPA, Section 1.6, pg. 1-10). • Considering the solar orientation of the buildings to reduce impact of the development with natural environment (SPA, Section 3.4, pg. 3-3). • Implementing passive and active solar systems to take advantage and consider the year -around abundant sunshine (SPA, Chapter 6, pg. 6-2). • Ensure the placement of structures to consider the environmental conditions including sun orientation and prevailing winds (SPA Chapter 3, pg. 3-1). Therefore, the Project is consistent with Policy SC-1.5 and associated programs in the Livable Community Element in the General Plan. 4.6,5 Cumulative Impacts The cumulative analysis for the Project property considers the geographic context of IID's and SoCal Gas's service areas, as well as the SSAB boundary. Growth within these geographies, partially attributable to the State's emphasis on housing development, is anticipated to increase the demand for energy resources, as well as the need for energy infrastructure (i.e., new or expanded facilities). Electricity Buildout of the Project, related projects, and additional forecasted growth in IID's service area would cumulatively increase the demand for electricity supplies and infrastructure capacity. IID's planning area consumed approximately 3,678.6 GWh of electricity in 2020. IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's planning area will be approximately 4,641.3 GWh annually by 2031. All future development projects would be expected to incorporate alternative energy (solar) and conservation features, comply with applicable regulations including CALGreen and State energy standards under Title 24, and incorporate other energy design features, as required. Increased efficiency, both in building orientation, construction materials and fixture design, will apply not only to the proposed Project, but to all cumulative projects developed within the service areas of local energy providers and fuel suppliers. Therefore, the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary use of electricity would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-21 October 2023 375 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Buildout of the LQGP would result in increased demand for electricity in IID's service area. IID have adequate policies, programs, and projects in place to provide energy to their users, including the proposed Project, for the foreseeable future. In order to maintain reliable energy services to meet future demand, IID outlines in their 2020 Service Area Plan planned energy generation facilities, substations, energy transmission lines, distribution facilities, and opportunities for shared energy facilities. The 2020 Service Area Plan also lists the IID's short-term (less than 5 years), mid-term (5 to 10 years), and long term (10 to 15 years) improvement plans of their facilities and mitigation of energy facilities to maintain an adequate energy supply to existing and future IID customers. As mentioned previously, IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's planning area will be approximately 4,641.3 GWh annually by 2031. Based on the Project's estimated new annual electrical consumption of 12.9879 GWh, the Project would account for approximately 0.28 percent of IID's total estimated demand in 2031. Although the demand for electricity will continue to increase with buildout of projects throughout the City and elsewhere in its service area, IID's planning, along with compliance with applicable energy reduction requirements, assures that the impacts associated with these cumulative projects will not be cumulatively considerable. The proposed construction of the off -site substation facility will provide electricity to the Project property and the surrounding area. However, the substation is accounted for in IID's service area growth projections and, therefore, will not facilitate additional development beyond that otherwise allowed under the General Plan. Additionally, IID has established a rate structure for developers and the service population to accommodate growth in the utility's service area. The monies received assists in funding the extension of facilities, the implementation of energy reducing strategies, and the application of renewable energy alternatives. IID procures renewable energy from diverse sources including biomass, biowaste, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, and wind. In 2015, IID started to exit its coal obligations, and in 2018, IID's resource portfolio was 100 percent coal free. In October 2015, SB 350 passed requiring 50 percent of IID's retail sales must come from eligible renewable energy sources by 2030. While SB 100 sets a goal of powering 100 percent of retail electricity sold in California and state agency electricity needs with renewable and zero -carbon resources. IID expects to meet and exceed compliance with this target with the use of renewable resources listed above. Buildout of the General Plan area is expected to occur over time. Therefore, IID's expansion plans in the Project area will be adjusted to accommodate future growth in the service area. Although buildout of the City and growth within IID's service area will increase demand for electrical services, State regulations for energy use and energy efficiency, the implementation of renewable and IID's ongoing analysis of existing and new facilities to provide reliable service and IID's rate structure will assure that cumulative impacts are not considerable. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-22 October 2023 376 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Natural Gas Buildout of the LQGP, the Project, other projects, and additional forecasted growth in SoCalGas's service area would cumulatively increase the demand for natural gas supplies and infrastructure capacity. SoCalGas has adequate policies and programs in place to provide energy to their users, including the proposed Project, for the foreseeable future. According to the 2020 California Gas Report, SoCalGas projects total gas demand to decline at an annual rate of 1 percent from 2020 to 2035. The decline in demand is due to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)-mandated energy efficiency standards and programs and SB 350 goals, as well as tighter standards created by revised Title 24 codes and standards, renewable energy goals, and conservation savings linked to Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). SoCalGas also invests in research and development of new and emerging clean, energy -efficient technologies for residential commercial, industrial, power generation, and transportation markets to reduce energy use. Additionally, SoCalGas set a commitment to achieve net zero emissions in their operations and delivery of energy by 2045. The implementation of SoCalGas's energy efficiency and conservation programs will reduce energy consumption within the service area. The 2018 California Gas Report estimates natural gas consumption within SoCalGas's planning area will be approximately 2,310 million cf per day in 2030. SoCalGas forecasts take into account projected population growth and development based on local and regional plans. Although the Project and future development would result in the use of natural gas resources, which could limit future availability, the use of such resources would be reduced by measures rendering future developments more energy efficient, and would be consistent with regional and local growth expectations for SoCalGas's service area. The proposed Project and future development projects would be expected to incorporate energy conservation features, comply with applicable regulations including CALGreen and State energy standards under Title 24, and incorporate energy design features, as required. Increased efficiency in fixture design will apply not only to the proposed Project, but to all cumulative projects developed within the service areas of the local energy providers. Therefore, the buildout of the City in conjunction with the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of natural gas would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant. Transportation Energy Buildout of the Project, other future projects, and additional forecasted growth would cumulatively increase the demand for transportation -related fuel in the State and region. SCAQMD estimates that the SSAB will consume approximately 326,288,400 gallons of total petroleum -based fuel in 2031. Furthermore, California consumes approximately 26 billion gallons of petroleum -based fuel per year. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-23 October 2023 377 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES Petroleum consumption associated with one year of Project operation is 0.0052 percent of the annual Statewide use (i.e., 26 billion gallons). Over the last decade the State has implemented several policies, rules, and regulations to improve vehicle efficiency, increase the development and use of alternative fuels, reduce air pollutants and GHGs from the transportation sector, and reduce VMT, which would reduce reliance on petroleum -based fuels. According to the CEC, total gasoline use per capita has declined by 6 percent since 2008. The CEC predicts that the demand for gasoline will continue to decline over the next 10 years and that there will be an increase in the use of alternative fuels, such as natural gas, biofuels, and electricity. As with the Project, other future development projects would be expected to reduce VMT by encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation and other design features that promote VMT reductions. Therefore, the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to petroleum -based fuel would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant. 4.6.6 Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures regarding energy resources are required. 4.6.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation The Project's compliance with existing State, regional, and City regulations, plans, and programs, as well as the incorporation of the use of energy efficient building materials and design features would ensure that Project impacts related to energy resources would be less than significant. 4.6.9 References 1. CARB, EMFAC2017 Web Database, available at https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/ 2. California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, California Energy Commission, Demand Analysis Office, February 2018. 3. California Public Utilities Commission, 2018 California Gas Report, pg 103. 4. Corporate Average Fuel Economy, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy. 5. California Climate Policy Fact Sheet: Renewables Portfolio Standard, UC Berkley Law, https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Fact-Sheet-RPS.pdf 6. California Energy Consumption Database, "Electricity Consumption by Planning Area", CEC; http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyplan.aspx 7. Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator —Calculations and References, Environmental Protection Agency; https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations- and-references. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-24 October 2023 378 4.6 ENERGY RESOURCES 8. Integrated Resource Plan, IID, November 2018; https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/636927586520070000. 9. Natural Gas and California, CUPC, accessed August 2020, https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural Ras/. 10. Service Area Plan 2020, IID, October 2020; https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18842. Travertine Draft EIR 4.6-25 October 2023 379 Page intentionally blank 380 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.7 Geology and Soils 4.7 Geology and Soils 4,7.1 Introduction This section describes the existing geotechnical setting (regionally and site specific) and proposed improvements to the Project site that could result in the placement of habitable structures in an area of known geologic hazards. This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment regarding proposed land uses; the Geotechnical Evaluation ("Geotechnical Evaluation"), prepared by NMG Geotechnical, Inc. in 2021; the Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, in 2021; the City of La Quinta General Plan 2035, and Technical Background Report to the Safety Element of the La Quinta General Plan, prepared by Earth Consultants International, Inc., September 2010; and the 2010, Geologic Map of California, Version 2.0 (California Geological Survey 150th Anniversary Edition), Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. The Project's Geotechnical Evaluation is included in the EIR in Appendix G.1, and the Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment is included in Appendix G.2. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR. 4.7.2 Existing Conditions Regional and Project Setting The Project property is located within the City of La Quinta, in the Coachella Valley area of central Riverside County. The Coachella Valley is bordered on the north and east by the Little San Bernardino, Cottonwood, and Orocopia Mountains, and bordered on the west by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains. The Coachella Valley is also considered the westernmost extension of the Colorado Desert Physiographic Province ("Colorado Desert"), which is characterized as a northwest -southeast trending structural depression extending from the Gulf of California to the Banning Pass. The Colorado Desert is bordered by the Peninsular Range and the Pacific Coastal Plain on the west and the Colorado River on the east, and located south of the Mojave Desert in Imperial, Riverside, and San Diego Counties. The Coachella Valley is semi -arid with seasonal temperature extremes and wind patterns. The mountains reach elevations of 6,000-10,000 feet and create a rain shadow effect in the Valley, which results in very little precipitation reaching the eastern slopes or the Valley floor. The annual average rainfall on the valley floor is 3.2 inches most of which occurs during the winter, with occasional summer tropical storms from the Gulf of Mexico that can result in flash floods. Runoff from the seasonally active streams, within washes that empty into the Valley, quickly sinks into the alluvial fans at the mouths of the canyons. The natural landforms that make up and surround the Project property define the topography of the property, generally consisting of east -facing mountain -front alluvial fan, sloping gently at approximately Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-1 October 2023 381 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 3 to 6 percent toward the east. Existing on -site elevations vary from a high of 270 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the west, to a low of 30 feet above msl in the east near Avenue 62. Locally, where Avenue 62 and Madison Avenue are proposed to cross the existing levee, elevations at the toes of the levee are below sea level (-10 feet msl). The highest elevation within the boundary of the grading is 455 feet msl in the southwest corner where two water tanks are proposed. On -site drainage sheet flows over the land surface toward existing washes and ultimately drains to the east. These flows historically made their way into the Whitewater River located approximately 7 miles east of the Project property. East of the Project property includes drainage facilities consisting of Dike No. 4 and the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility. Surface flows, along with imported Colorado River Water, are now impounded and infiltrate into the Coachella Valley groundwater basin. Seismicity and Faulting The City of La Quinta, similar to most of Southern California, is susceptible to earthquakes due to the multiple active faults that traverse the region. The 2035 La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) highlights four faults with the potential to have a significant impact in the City. These faults include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, Burnt Mountain and Elsinore Faults; although none of these faults are located on or in proximity of the Project property. Faulting Most of Southern California, including the Coachella Valley, is located at the boundary between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. These plates slide past each other in a northwesterly direction at a rate of approximately 2.5 inches annually, forming the San Andreas Fault system. Based on the frequency and magnitude of earthquakes, and their influence over seismic hazards in the area, the San Andreas is considered the "Master Fault" in Southern California. The Southern segment of the San Andreas Fault Zone occurs approximately 4 miles northeast of the City of La Quinta and approximately 10 miles northeast of the Project property. The San Jacinto Fault Zone is one of the major branches that influences the Coachella Valley. The San Jacinto Fault Zone is a strike -slip fault zone and occurs approximately 16 miles southwest of the City of La Quinta. Per the Alquist-Priolo Act, an active fault is one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years. Both fault zones are active and can generate earthquakes of magnitude greater than 7.0 on the Richter scale, which, if strong enough, may trigger seismic hazards such as ground shaking, landslides and liquefaction. A bedrock fault is mapped within the project area in the northern portion of the site extending toward the south and buried under the alluvial fan. This fault was also shown on the Technical Background Report of the Safety Element of the LQGP as an inactive fault. There are no faults mapped at the Project property by other published maps. The Project property is not located within a fault -rupture hazard zone as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act or within an active or potentially active fault zone defined by Riverside County. The closest seismically active faults to the Project property are the Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-2 October 2023 382 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS San Andreas Fault located 9.8 miles to the northeast, and the San Jacinto Fault located 14.8 miles southwest. However, at the Project property the main seismic hazard would be seismic shaking, which the buildings will be designed to withstand based on the current California Building Code design parameters. Seismicity Southern California is subject to seismic hazards of varying degrees depending on the proximity, degree of activity, and capability of nearby faults. These hazards can be primary (i.e., directly related to the energy release of an earthquake such as surface rupture and ground shaking) or secondary (i.e., related to the effect of earthquake energy on soils and groundwater, which can cause phenomena such as settlement, liquefaction and ground lurching). The strength of an earthquake is a function of distance from the epicenter, and soil and rock composition through which the shear wave passes. A variety of logarithmic scales have been used by seismologists to measure earthquakes. A common measure of seismic intensity is the Modern Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale, which measures damage ranging from partial or total collapse of masonry structures to severe damage or devastation of underground infrastructure, bridges, overpasses, or other improvements. The Richter Scale measures the maximum amplitude, based on a scale from one to ten, while the Ground Acceleration is based on the distance of a given location from the earthquake epicenter. The closest seismically active fault is about 10 miles away from the Project property; therefore, the potential for primary ground rupture is considered very low. Secondary seismic hazards include liquefaction and earthquake -induced slope instability. However, due to the depth to groundwater at the Project property (more than 50 feet deep), liquefaction potential at the property is considered very low (Geotechnical Evaluation, Appendix G.11). The potential for seismically induced landslides is also considered very low due to conditions within most of the development boundaries of the Project property and the mitigation measures discussed further in Section 4.7.4, Project Impact Analysis. Landslides As a result of seismic ground shaking, secondary effects such as slope failures, rockfalls and landslides may occur in the City, especially throughout elevated areas. According to the LQGP, landslides and rockfall can occur when unstable slope conditions are worsened by strong ground motion caused by seismic events. Typically, landslides have been recorded after periods of heavy rainfall, and rockfalls are associated with slope failure during drier periods. Conditions that lead to landslide vulnerability include high seismic potential, and rockfall and rockslides are common on very steep slopes. Therefore, areas 1 Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation and Planning Study, Proposed Residential Development at Travertine, NMG Geotechnical, Inc., August 2021. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-3 October 2023 383 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS where development is located directly below hillside, mountain slopes and steep canyon walls are considered most susceptible to rockfalls. Soils A relatively thick sequence (20,000 feet) of sediment has been deposited in the Coachella Valley portion of the Colorado Desert Physiographic Province from Miocene to present times. These sediments are predominantly terrestrial in nature with some lacustrine (lake) deposits. The major contributor of these sediments has been the Colorado River. The mountains surrounding the Coachella Valley are composed primarily of Precambrian metamorphic and Mesozoic granitic rocks. Soils in the City of La Quinta are generally of Holocene -age, comprised of alluvial, or waterborne sand and gravel, lacustrine (lake) sediments, and Aeolian (windborne) sandy soils in the valley portion of the City. Older, harder, crystalline rock that occurs in the mountains weathers and forms boulders and cobbles, or further erodes. The erosion creates fine particles (gravels, sands and silts) that are carried along canyons and drainages downslope, and are deposited as alluvial fans at the base of mountain slopes. The region and City of La Quinta were inundated by ancient Lake Cahuilla as recently as 400 years ago. Lacustrine deposits may be up to 300 feet thick and may form clay soils in the valley areas where these soils alternate in layers with alluvial fan sediments and rock debris from the adjacent mountains. There are eleven primary soil series that have been mapped in the City of La Quinta. Nine of these are formed in alluvium: Carrizo Stony Sand, Caristas Sands, Coachella Sands, Fluvents, Gravel Pits and Dumps, Gilman Sands and Loams, Indio Loams, Myoma Fine Sands, Salton Fine Sandy Loam. Except for Salton Fine Sandy Loam, these soils are generally well -drained. Two other soil types, Rock Outcrop and Rubble Lands dominate the western and southern portions of the City, in and near the Santa Rosa Mountains and alluvial fans. The Project property sits on alluvial fan deposits at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The Project property lies along the west side of the Coachella Valley, approximately 14 miles northwest of the Salton Sea. The property is situated primarily west of ancient Lake Cahuilla that occasionally has inundated the Coachella Valley over the past 6,000(±) years. Bedrock is exposed along the northern perimeter and southwest corner of the site and consists of Mesozoic -age plutonic (granitic) rocks. Bedrock units present in the adjacent Santa Rosa Mountains to the west include both Mesozoic -age granitic rock and Pre - Cenozoic -age granitic and metamorphic rocks. Surficial deposits include numerous generations of Quaternary -age alluvial fan deposits. Undocumented artificial fill associated with grading of flood control levees and the abandoned vineyard are present at the Project property. The subsurface soil conditions of the Project property were analyzed Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-4 October 2023 384 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS by NMG Geotechnical, Inc.' during onsite field investigations and boring tests. Overall, NMG Geotechnical completed seven exploratory boreholes throughout the property in 2021 to supplement the prior geotechnical borings and trenches by others'. Mapped earth units within the development area are discussed in the Geotechnical Evaluation. Finally, it should be noted that several generations of Undocumented Artificial Fills were discovered onsite, including those associated with the vineyard and flood control levee grading. The undocumented artificial fills will be removed and recompacted during grading of the Project site. Soil mapping by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) only covers portions of the Project property. NMG Geotechnical utilized the existing available data and modified/extended the soil mapping to cover the Project property based on the soil types presented in the USDA mapping and our field mapping. The soil types mapped on the Project property includes Carrizo stony sand (CcC) 2-9 percent slopes; Carsitas gravelly sand (CdC) 0-9 percent slope; Gilman fine sandy loam (GbD); Myoma fine sand (MaB); Rock Outcrop (RO); and Rubble Land (Ru). The granitic bedrock outcrops and elevated older alluvial fan deposits largely composed of cobbles and boulders have been designated as Rock Outcrop and Rubble Land, respectively, in the USDA mapping. The lower lying younger alluvial fans and active wash materials are also designated as Carrizo stony sand and Carsitas gravelly sand. Erosion Climate, topography, soil and rock types, and vegetation are all factors that influence erosion, runoff, and sedimentation. Adjacent mountains are composed of fractured bedrock that has undergone rapid geologic uplift. The Coachella Valley, including La Quinta, is subject to infrequent but often powerful winter storms that generate high rates of erosion. The high winds can lift soils from alluvial fans along the base of mountain slopes and canyons and other areas where loose, sandy soils occur. The onsite soils are generally clean granular materials. Erosion occurs in these soils by uncontrolled surface drainage, where the water running over the ground surface creates numerous erosional channels over the desert surface. High winds can also erode the land surface, by removing the finer sandy soils that blow away leaving the larger heavier rocks on the land surface. This latter condition can be seen at the site on the older fan deposits. As previously stated, the lower lying younger alluvial fans and active wash materials are generally granular and subject to erosion. Historic Ground Subsidence Ground subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of the ground surface with little or no horizontal movement. It is caused by both human activities (i.e., groundwater extraction) and natural activities (i.e., z Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation and Planning Study, NMG Geotechnical, Inc. August 2021. 3 Appendix B of the Geotechnical Evaluation indicates the boring and test pit logs by others. The laboratory test results by others are provided in Appendix C of the Geotechnical Evaluation. A complete reference lists is provided in Appendix A of the Geotechnical Evaluation. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-5 October 2023 385 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS earthquakes) and can cause regional damage. In the presence of clay and silt, removal of groundwater can cause irreversible subsidence and surface fissures and cracks. According to the La Quinta General Plan, recorded subsidence induced fissures in the Coachella Valley occurred in La Quinta in 1948, near the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, at the south end of the City, where fissures and displacement are more likely to occur (at the edge of the valley floor where it meets the mountains). This was due to the increased pumping that occurred throughout the Coachella Valley. Regional land subsidence as a result of groundwater withdrawal in the Coachella Valley has also been studied bythe United Stated Geological Survey (USGS) overthe past 25 years. Since the 1990s, increasing agricultural, domestic, and municipal groundwater withdrawal has lowered the water table in Coachella Valley as much as 50 vertical feet, which in turn resulted in widespread land subsidence. Monitoring conducted by the USGS and CVWD shows that subsidence rates in the Coachella Valley have been increasing over the past several decades, especially during periods of overdraft of the basins. Between 1995 and 2010, water level records indicated that groundwater levels were the lowest in 2010. The majority of this measured subsidence occurred in the central portions of the City of La Quinta, north of Avenue 60, where up to two feet was recorded. However, groundwater levels within the La Quinta area have shown recovery coinciding with increased groundwater replenishment at the Thomas E. Levy Facility beginning in mid-2009. Collapse Hydroconsolidation or soil collapse typically occurs in recently deposited sediments that accumulated in an arid or semi -arid environment. Sediments prone to collapse are commonly associated with alluvial fan and debris flow sediments deposited during flash floods. These deposits are typically dry and contain minute pores and voids, which are partially supported by clay, silt or carbonate bonds. Collapsible soils become unstable when saturated and can result in settlement. An increase in surface water infiltration (i.e., irrigation for landscaping), or a rise in the groundwater table, combined with the weight of a building or structure, can initiate rapid settlement and cause foundations and walls to crack. According to the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR), the young alluvial and wind -deposited sediments in the La Quinta area may be locally susceptible to collapse due to their low density, rapid deposition in the desert environment, and the generally dry condition of the upper soils. Based on laboratory testing by NMG and others, the onsite alluvial soils have less than 2 percent potential for hydroconsolidation or soil collapse. Sewer Service The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides the City of La Quinta with sanitary sewer collection and treatment, and according to the La Quinta General Plan, most of the City is served by sewer. CVWD has two wastewater treatment plants serving the City. Wastewater generated south of Miles Avenue is treated at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant, which has the capacity of 9.5 million gallons per day Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-6 October 2023 386 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS (MGD), and current daily treatment of 5 MGD. The Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) is located in Thermal, southeast of the City and City's Sphere of Influence. CVWD owns and operates the sewer conveyance system anchored by a system of trunk lines ranging in size from 4 to 24 inches, including 18-inch force mains in Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Madison Street, and Avenues 50, 58 and 60. The Project property is located at the western extension of Avenue 62 and the southern extension of Jefferson Street. The Project property will connect to CVWD sewer infrastructure via Avenue 62. The proposed sewer infrastructure will serve the Project. Septic systems are not proposed onsite. Paleontological Resources In general, paleontological resources, or fossils, are the remains, imprints, or traces of once -living organisms preserved in or on the Earth's crust that are of paleontological interest and provide information about the history of life on Earth. These include mineralized, partially mineralized, or un- mineralized bones and teeth, soft tissues, shells, wood, leaf, impressions, footprints, burrows, and microscopic remains. The loss of any identifiable fossil that could yield information important to prehistory, or that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type of organism, environment, period of time, or geographic region, would be a significant environmental impact. Direct impacts on paleontological resources primarily concern the potential destruction of nonrenewable paleontological resources and the loss of information associated with these resources. This includes the unauthorized collection of fossil remains. If potentially fossiliferous bedrock or surficial sediments are disturbed, the disturbance could result in the destruction of paleontological resources and subsequent loss of information (a significant impact). At the project -specific level, direct impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of paleontological mitigation. According to the Paleontological Report', paleontological resources can be considered to be of significant scientific interest if they meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. The fossils provide information on the evolutionary relationships and developmental trends among organisms, living or extinct; 2. The fossils provide data useful in determining the age(s) of the rock unit or sedimentary stratum, including data important in determining the depositional history of the region and the timing of geologic events therein; 3. The fossils provide data regarding the development of biological communities or interaction between paleobotanical and paleozoological biotas; 4. The fossils demonstrate unusual or spectacular circumstances in the history of life; or 4 Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Travertine Development, SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-7 October 2023 387 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 5. The fossils are in short supply and/or in danger of being depleted or destroyed by the elements, vandalism, or commercial exploitation, and are not found in other geographic locations. According to the Paleontological Report, the Project property is located along the southwestern margin of the Coachella Valley, west-northwest of the Salton Sea. The Coachella Valley is located at the northernmost extent of the Salton Trough formed by ongoing tectonic activity. Per the Paleontological Report, the Salton Trough was episodically inundated by marine water during the Pliocene and Pleistocene and fresh water during the Holocene, the last lake cycle of which formed Lake Cahuilla, believed to have existed intermittently from 470 years before present (BP) to approximately 6,000 years BP. Around the margins of the Salton Trough, at approximately 40 feet above mean seal level (msl), the ancient highstand shoreline of Lake Cahuilla is visible. Older discontinuous terrace deposits within the Salton Trough indicate the existence of other large lakes that may have been connected to the Gulf of California prior to the existence of Lake Cahuilla. Within the Coachella Valley Holocene (recent to 11,700 years ago) alluvium eroded from the surrounding mountain ranges and overlie the older lacustrine sediments from Lake Cahuilla and the other, older, lakes that occupied the Salton Trough. The younger alluvial deposits brought into the area by flooding in the mountains and are too recent, at least at the surface, to hold fossil remains, since fossils are often contained within surficial sediments or bedrock. The age of these units likely increases with depth. According to Riverside County, "surface geology, such as soils, are not always indicative of subsurface geology or the potential for paleontological resources. For instance, an area mapped as soil type 'Qal' may actually be a thin surficial layer of nonfossiliferous sediment which covers fossil -rich Pleistocene sediments". Therefore, these units may have a low potential for paleontological resources at shallow depths, but the potential may increase at depth. The surrounding mountain formations are composed of igneous and metamorphic rock and therefore have a very low and low paleontological sensitivity. Paleontological resources occur in older alluvial fan and lacustrine sediments which have been deposited in the Valley over millions of years. As mentioned previously, these older lacustrine sediments have been covered over time by younger Holocene sediments deposited by fluvial deposition. These older lakebed deposits normally contain minor marine deposits. The closest fossil localities to the project area were discovered in Lake Cahuilla beds underlying younger alluvium at depths of 1.5 to 4 meters (approximately 3 km) to the north of the Project property at PGA west. These fossils are described as: Ostracods; fringe - toed lizard (Uma); rodents (Ammospermophilus pergonathus): bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis); and invertebrates. Existing on -site elevations vary from a high of 270 feet above msl in the west, to a low of 30 feet above msl in the east near Avenue 62. Exhibit III-5, Paleontological Sensitivity Map in the LQGP, designates the Project property in Holocene Alluvium which has an "undetermined" paleontological sensitivity, and the Riverside County paleontological sensitivity map classifies the Project property location as Low Potential and Undetermined Potential. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-8 October 2023 388 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS • Undetermined Potential is defined as areas underlain by sedimentary units for which insufficient literature is available to make a determination of paleontological sensitivity. • Low Potential is defined as "lands for which previous field surveys and documentation demonstrate as having a low potential for containing significant paleontological resources subject to adverse impacts". According to the Paleontological Report (Appendix G.2), the majority of the surface of the Project property consists of Quaternary alluvium of Holocene age. Alluvium is composed of gravel, sand, silt, and clay -sized sediments derived from the surrounding highlands. Locally, these sediments are associated with deposition along or above the ancient Lake Cahuilla shoreline. Deposits younger than 5,000 years BP are too young to contain fossils, although they may contain cultural and biological remains; however, they overlie older sediments that may preserve fossil resources. While the exact depth at which the transition to older (greater than 5,000 years BP) sediments is not known, fossils have been discovered in unnamed and named Pleistocene older alluvial sediments within Riverside County, including in the Coachella Valley, at depths as shallow as 1.5 to 3 m (5 to 10 feet) below ground surface. As previously stated, the closest fossil localities to the Project property were discovered in Lake Cahuilla beds underlying younger alluvium at depths of 1.5 to 4 m (approximately 3 km) to the north of the Project property. Therefore, Holocene alluvium may immediately overlie Lake Cahuilla deposits in some areas and/or transition to late Pleistocene alluvium, lacustrine, or other older geologic units in other areas at depths as shallow as 1.5 m. Additionally, an initial paleontological field survey was conducted by SWCA. The field survey did not discover paleontological resources onsite because the surface soils have low paleontological sensitivity. However, some soils found onsite (including alluvium, alluvial fan gravels, and Lake Cahuilla Beds) have increased paleontological sensitivity in the subsurface (increases with depth). 4.7.3 Regulatory Setting Federal National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended through 1992, establishes that the federal government shall partner with states, local governments, Indian Tribes, and private organizations and individuals to protect and manage both federally and non -federally owned historic and prehistoric resources. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-9 October 2023 389 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS State Public Resources Code (PRQ Section 5097.5 Requirements for paleontological resource management are included in the PRC Division 5, Chapter 1.7, Section 5097.5, and Division 20, Chapter 3, Section 30244. These statues prohibit the removal, without permission, of any paleontological site or feature from lands under the jurisdiction of the state or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, local agencies are required to comply with PRC 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others. PRC Section 5097.5 also establishes the removal of paleontological resources as a misdemeanor and requires reasonable mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources from developments on public (state, county, city, and district) lands. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was enacted in 1972 to prohibit the location of developments and structures for human occupancy across the trace of active faults. To assist with this, the State Geologist delineates appropriately wide earthquake fault zones (Alquist-Priolo Zones) to encompass potentially and recently active traces, which are submitted to city and county agencies to be incorporated into their land use planning and construction policies. An active fault is defined as one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years. There are no active faults mapped onsite or within several miles of the Project property. Seismic Hazard Mapping Act The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) of 1990 directs the Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey to identify and map areas prone to earthquake hazards of liquefaction, earthquake - induced landslides and amplified ground shaking. The purpose of the SHMA is to reduce the threat to public safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating these seismic hazards. The SHMA requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones (Zones of Required Investigation) and to issue appropriate maps (Seismic Hazard Zone maps). These maps are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling construction and development. The La Quinta General Plan includes a comprehensive Safety Element that is based on a detailed technical report that described and maps all geotechnical and seismic hazards occurring in La Quinta. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-10 October 2023 390 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (California Building Standard Code) The California Building Standards Commission operates within the Department of General Services and is charged with the responsibility to administer the process of approving and adopting building standards for publication in the California Building Standards Code (Cal. Code Regs., Title 24). These regulations include provisions for site work, demolition, and construction, which include excavation and grading, as well as provisions for foundations, retaining walls, and expansive and compressible soils. The California Building Code (CBC) also provides guidelines for building design to protect occupants from seismic hazards. The City of La Quinta Building Division uses the 2019 CBC in the plan check process and in field inspections. The City's Building Division will use the latest CBC in effect at the time of application for building permits within the Project property as applications within planning areas are submitted. Regional and Local City of La Quinta Municipal Code Title 8 — Buildings and Construction Building, construction, and grading activities for the Project would be subject to Title 8 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, which governs the conditions, construction, and maintenance of all property, buildings, and structures within the City. Title 8 is based on the 2019 CBC, which sets minimum design and standards for construction of buildings and structures that must also meet minimum seismic design standards. Title 7 — Historical Preservation Chapter 7.06 of the Municipal Code, Historic Resources, Historic Landmarks and Historic Districts, requires City Council to establish and maintain a historic resources inventory according to the requirements of the State Historic Preservation Office. Criteria for inclusion in the history resources inventory includes archaeological, paleontological, botanical, geological, topographical, ecological, and geographical sites that have the potential to yield information of scientific value. City of La Quinta General Plan Adopted on February 19, 2013, and amended on November 19, 2013, the City of La Quinta General Plan Soils and Geology Element (Chapter IV: Environmental Hazards) assesses the physical characteristics of the planning area and the community's overall safety. This element relates to the need to protect the community from unreasonable risks from seismically induced hazards, including surface rupture, groundshaking, ground failure, seiching, dam failure, subsidence, and other geologic risks. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-11 October 2023 391 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The Natural Resource Element of the General Plan also assesses the potential of paleontological resources in the General Plan area. The General Plan requires the protection of significant archaeological, historic, and paleontological resources which occur in the City. 4.7.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following standards and criteria have been drawn from Appendix G: Environmental Checklist Form of the CEQA Guidelines. Would development of the Travertine Project: a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b. Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Methodology Geotechnical Evaluation A Geotechnical Evaluation was prepared for the Project property by NMG Geotechnical (NMG), in August 2021 (Appendix G.1) to explore the surface and subsurface conditions at the site and regional geotechnical conditions that could adversely affect future development on the Project property. The report also provides recommendations for foundation design and site preparation relative to the grading and development of the Project. NMG conducted a field exploration program, borings, laboratory testing, and geologic mapping of the Project property. The geotechnical consultant also completed an infiltration study for the two proposed stormwater basins in the eastern portion of the property. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-12 October 2023 392 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Specifically, the Project property characterizations consisted of a comprehensive literature search, review of historic photos, site surveys and subsurface borings, mapping of on -site and nearby geologic units, a rippability analysis, percolation studies and lab testing of soil samples. The report also provides findings, conclusions and recommendations. Paleontological Resources Assessment Agency maps illustrating regional and local areas of paleontological sensitivity were consulted to analyze the potential impacts to paleontological resources. Because both the LQGP and Riverside County paleontological sensitivity maps depicted all or a portion of the Project site as undetermined potential for paleontological resources a Project -specific Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment (referred to as "Paleontological Report" herein) was provided by SWCA Environmental Consultants ("SWCA") in November 2021 (Appendix G.2). The Paleontological Report was conducted to identify and describe paleontological resources that could be affected by ground -disturbing activities associated with the Project, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In order to analyze the Project's impact on paleontological resources, the Paleontological Report assessed approximately 969.40 acres, which included field surveys of the Project property and area of potential disturbance (referred to as the located on "Travertine Area of Potential Effect" or "APE"). This study includes the results of an updated records search for the APE, an intensive pedestrian survey of those portions of the APE not covered in previous reports, a summary of all resources within the APE and ADI, an archaeological sensitivity assessment for the off -site utility field (referred to as "IID/CVWD Study Area" in the Paleontological Report), and management recommendations for the Project as a whole that incorporate the results of Native American (AB52) consultation. The specific locations for the off -site well sites and substation (referred to as the "IID/CVWD Study Area") have not been selected for development at the time the Paleontological Report and this Draft EIR were prepared. Therefore, the Paleontological Report evaluated the general areas where the IID/CVWD Study Area will be sited (generally east of the APE). The Paleontological Report states that no formal records search or pedestrian survey was conducted for the IID/CVWD Study Area. The Travertine area of potential effect (APE) and off -site utility field make up the overall project area analyzed in the Paleontological Report and in this chapter (Figure 3 of the Paleontological Report). In order to identify any paleontological resource localities that may exist in or near the Project site and to assess the probability for such resources, SWCA initiated records searches at the appropriate repositories, conducted a literature review, and carried out a systematic field survey of the Project site. The methods of the Paleontological Report are provided below. • Records searches by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM) and an updated review of the scientific literature and geologic mapping of the project area. • Review of the University of California Museum of Paleontology's (UCMP) online collections database. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-13 October 2023 393 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS • A paleontological pedestrian field survey was conducted by SWCA. This field study was utilized in the 2021 report. Utilizing the results of the desktop analysis and field survey, the study assessed the paleontological sensitivity of the geologic units crossed by Project site and assigned them BLM Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC) rankings as follows: alluvium has PFYC 2 (Low) to PFYC 4 (High), increasing with depth; alluvial fan gravels have PFYC 2 (Low) to PFYC 3 (Moderate), increasing with depth; landslide deposits have PFYC 2 (Low); Lake Cahuilla Beds have PFYC 4 (High); and quartz diorite has PFYC 1 (Very Low). Project Impacts a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault According to the Geotechnical Evaluation (Appendix F.1), the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones are located approximately 10 miles northeast and 14.8 miles southwest of the Project property, respectively. No major active faults are mapped onsite or in the vicinity of the property. Additionally, the Project property does not lie within a currently delineated State of California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The geotechnical investigation performed for this project indicates that there are no active faults or areas of potential ground rupture at or in the vicinity of the property. Therefore, there will be no impact associated with fault rupture on -site. Off -Site Utility Field Improvements The proposed off -site utility field improvements include the development of five well sites and a substation. The exact locations of the offsite improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located east of the Project property, located within a 2-mile radius of the Project property, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west, as shown on Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. Similar to the Project property, the locations of the off -site utility field improvements do not lie within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or in proximity to any active fault. Therefore, no impacts associated with fault rupture at the off -site utility field locations are anticipated. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-14 October 2023 394 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Regional faults, including the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones, have the potential to generate moderate to severe ground shaking at the Project property (Peak Ground Acceleration of 0.58g). The Project property is located approximately 10 miles southwest of the closest active fault zone, the San Andreas Fault, which is the controlling fault for the property. Therefore, this fault, as well as other regionally active faults, could produce ground shaking of less than 0.58g at the Project property. Project development will be constructed in a manner that reduces the risk of seismic hazards (Title 24, California Code of Regulations). According to the Project -specific Geotechnical Evaluation and the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), Site Class D may be used to estimate design seismic loading for the proposed Project's structures. The Site Class is based on the site soil properties in accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7. Site Class D is classified as "stiff soil". The Geotechnical Evaluation indicates that Project property soil conditions can be optimized and outlines seismic design criteria and parameters for the Project to implement in order to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The design criteria and parameters were developed in accordance with ASCE 7-16 and 2019 CBC and are included as Mitigation Measure GEO-1. The Project shall also comply with all applicable provisions of the CBC, specifically Chapter 16 of the CBC, Structural Design, Section 1613, Earthquake Loads. Site work will be conducted in accordance with the Project -specific geotechnical and soils analyses required with the submittal of grading and building plans. This is required in Mitigation Measure GEO-2. Foundation and structural design of the proposed Project, required by regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2, would reduce exposure of people or structures to adverse effects to less than significant levels. Off -Site Utility Field Improvements Similar to the proposed Project property, the future off -site wells and substation (off -site utility field) will likely experience strong seismic ground shaking, during the life of these facilities, due to proximity to the San Andreas Fault. CVWD and IID facilities are required to be designed to take seismic hazards into consideration. Impacts of seismic ground shaking will be reduced to less than significant levels with the Project's compliance with State and local (CVWD and IID) standards regarding seismic design. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking of relatively long duration and intensity occurs in areas of loose, unconsolidated soils with relatively shallow groundwater depths (50 feet or less). The sudden increase in water pressure in pores between soil grains may substantially decrease soil shear strength, and the soil takes on the qualities of a liquid or a semi -viscous substance. This loss of soil strength can result in ground settlement, ground undulation, lateral spreading or displacement, and flow failures. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-15 October 2023 395 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The LQGP and Riverside County provide area -wide and regional mapping of potential secondary seismic hazards, such as liquefaction susceptibility and earthquake -induced slope instability. Zones of potentially liquefiable soil, as defined by the County of Riverside, indicate low to very low liquefaction susceptibility at the Project property. Exhibit IV-3, Seismic Hazards, of the LQGP also indicates that the Project is located within areas of Low to Very Low susceptibility. Groundwater has not been encountered in borings or test pits excavated during any of the prior exploratory work. According to the 2019 CVWD engineering report, groundwater in the area occurs at an approximate elevation of -75 feet below mean sea level (msl) or about 115 feet or more below the Project property surface. Ongoing replenishment has substantially increased the groundwater table in the valley over the past decade. There are several CVWD groundwater monitoring wells within the western portion of the Project property. In 2019, groundwater levels varied from 125 feet deep in the central portion of the property to 60 feet deep on Madison Avenue, north of Dike No. 4. Due to the location and elevation of the existing groundwater recharge facility immediately east and downgradient of the Project property, as well as current groundwater measurements conducted in 2019 approximately 10 years following the initiation of water replenishment activities in 2009, it is not expected for groundwater elevations to rise within 50 feet of the planned development due to groundwater replenishment activities. In order to ensure that effects associated with ground failure are less than significant, the Project will be required to comply with the site preparation and foundation recommendations listed in the Project - specific Geotechnical Evaluation. The Geotechnical Evaluation recommends that remedial grading within the planned building areas include the removal, over -excavation and recompaction of unsuitable weathered portions of the soils. Additionally, the removal of any pavement or concrete, turf, landscaping, miscellaneous trash and debris, and disposal of deleterious material that are incompatible for development or materials with insufficient load -bearing capacity to support the onsite structures are recommended. These recommended mitigating measures would ensure that Project soils are absent of debris, organic material, and loose surface soil, and are compacted to provide firm and uniform foundation bearing conditions. Grading activities and removal of unsuitable or otherwise unsuitable soils are prescribed in Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-5 below. Less than significant impacts of seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction, are anticipated. Additionally, secondary effects of liquefaction, such as lateral spread, are not anticipated to occur at the Project property due to the lack of shallow groundwater. Impacts will be less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field Improvements The proposed off -site utility field include the development of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre electrical substation. The exact locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located east of the Project property, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-16 October 2023 396 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS According to Exhibit IV-3 of the LQGP, the proposed off -site parcels are located in areas mapped to have high liquefaction susceptibility; however, review of recent monitoring wells and other groundwater data indicate that depth to groundwater in these areas is greater than 50 feet. The off -site utility field areas are underlain by youthful, unconsolidated sediments, and historically shallow groundwater. The well sites and substation will be developed in a manner that reduces potential impacts of liquefaction at the sites by implementing remedial grading, including the removal and over -excavation of site soils (implemented as Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-5). Additional geotechnical evaluations may need to occur once the off -site utility properties have been selected, and prior to their development in order to ensure the potential effects of liquefaction at these off -site properties will be less than significant. Therefore, less than significant impacts from liquefaction or other ground failure are anticipated. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. iv. Landslides The Project property is located in proximity to Coral Mountain and the Martinez Rockslide, and west of the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The Seismic Hazard Map (Exhibit IV-3) in the LQGP illustrates that the Project property lies adjacent to areas susceptible to earthquake -induced soil slumps and rock falls. Due to the Project's distance from the Santa Rosa Mountains, the Project is not anticipated to induce rockfalls or landslides. The granitic bedrock ridge associated with Coral Mountain at the north end of the Project property was found to generally be fractured and jointed and has been mapped as a potential rockfall hazard. In general, the Project proposes no development to occur within a 100-foot offset from this bedrock ridge. However, the Geotechnical Evaluation recommends that a rockfall hazard review and/or analysis should be performed at a later date at this location once plans are further developed to evaluate this hazard and provide refined mitigation recommendations (i.e., additional special buffer, impact walls, berms/channels, etc.) if required. This is indicated as Mitigation Measure GEO-6. The Martinez Rockslide is a 4.5-mile-long natural feature of fractured and unconsolidated bedrock, boulders, cobble and gravel that broke away from the Santa Rosa Mountains at an elevation of 6,320 feet above msl, where it was deposited and came to a stop on the gently sloping alluvium. The toe of the Martinez Rockslide landslide consists primarily of boulder material with an elevated slope that is 200 to 300 feet above the adjacent alluvial fan, and therefore, could result in rockfall. However, development setbacks will be approximately 950 feet from the toe of the Rockslide and separated by approximately 301.2 acres of natural open space. Based on the setback distance and lack of potential energy and upslope materials, NMG determined that the Project is unlikely to impact the Martinez Rockslide landform. Proposed Development Manufactured Slopes Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-17 October 2023 397 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The Project proposes the mass grading of the principal development site to created large development pads with elevations and inclinations that protect developed lands from area -wide flooding and that facilitate changes in slope and intra-project drainage. Inclusive of these activities will be the construction of stormwater diversion embankment along the western and southern portion of the principal development site. A variety of permanent and temporary "slopes" will be constructed, with temporary slopes being backfilled and restored to grade and development pads and flood control facilities will become permanent integral parts of the development. The construction of both temporary and permanent slopes could generate both cave-in and landslide hazards and have been analyzed in the Geotechnical Evaluation and discussed below. Permanent Artificial Slopes The Project proposes permanent artificial slopes up to 80 feet high that will be cut from and/or underlain by alluvial fan materials. The proposed slopes will be engineered to be globally stable under static and pseudo -static loading conditions, and will include remedial removal of inappropriate fill materials. Recommendations set forth in the Project Geotechnical Evaluation for ongoing design engineering will ensure that all manufactured slopes are appropriately designed and constructed (Mitigation Measures GEO-4, GEO-7, and GEO-8). Mitigation strategies that will be applied during Project site development include requirements that the stability of permanent manufactured slopes are protected from erosion. Moreover, the Geotechnical Evaluation establishes setback standards for structures from major manufactured slopes, including but not limited to retaining walls located above descending slopes. Structural setbacks, including those for retaining walls, shall be established as prescribed by the Project consulting geologist (Mitigation Measure GEO-9). The Project shall be required to implement Mitigation Measures GEO-4, and GEO-7 through GEO-9 in order to reduce impacts of permanent slopes to less than significant levels. Temporary Slopes According to the Geotechnical Evaluation, Project -related temporary excavations may expose varying earth materials, including both compacted and undocumented fills, and alluvial fan deposits. Temporary slopes in alluvial fans are anticipated to be subject to slope failure due to the sandy nature of the alluvium and lack of cohesion. Therefore, standard development guidelines, as set forth in the Project Geotechnical Evaluation, will be implemented during the development of the temporary slopes to reduce impacts of temporary slope failures to less than significant levels. In order to reduce the potential rockfall hazard, and to help with surficial stability of manufactured slopes, stabilization fills are recommended for cut slopes at the Project property. Stabilization fills will replace slope materials with uniform compacted fill, with the removal of boulders from the outer portions of the slope face. In order to adequately reduce potential impacts of rockfalls and landslides, the project will implement Mitigation Measure GEO-4, and GEO-6 through GEO-9 which outline slope stabilization recommendations in the Project Geotechnical Evaluation. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-18 October 2023 398 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The implementation of GEO-4, and GEO-6 through GEO-9 will reduce impacts of landslides and rockfall to less than significant levels. Off -Site Utility Field Improvements The proposed off -site utility field improvements include the development of five well sites and a 2.5- acre substation. The proposed off -site improvements will be located east of the Project property, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. This area is characterized by relatively flat topography and is not located near slopes. Therefore, the off -site improvements are not anticipated to induce landslides or rockfalls. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of top soil The Project property encompasses approximately 855 acres of vacant land in the southern portion of the City of La Quinta. The Project proposes a mixed -use development that will include associated improvements such as mass -graded development pads and flood protection levees and diversions, paved roadways with three all-weather crossings, landscaped features and pedestrian walkways. The Wind Erosion Susceptibility Map (Exhibit IV-5) in the La Quinta General Plan specifies that the Project property is located in an area with a high and very high Wind Erodibility Rating. Windborne Erosion The Project property is currently vacant with scattered, low-lying vegetation, and remnants of an abandoned vineyard on approximately 220 acres in the northern portion of the property. The construction of this Project will involve ground disturbing activities, such as the clearing and grubbing of existing vegetation, removal of materials associated with pervious vineyard operations, and grading of the property. Development will also include mass and fine grading associated with manufactured development pads and flood control embankments. These activities will expose large areas of undisturbed land and will substantially increase the potential of soil erosion during development. In order to reduce the effect of windborne erosion at the Project site, prior to site disturbance, the Project shall submit and implement a City -approved dust control plan that is compliant with the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (PM10 Plan). Windborne erosion is not a concern following Project development because the property will be vegetated and landscaped, and stabilized following implementation of required stabilization that is found within the PM10 Plan during construction. Proper development and implementation of the plan will ensure that wind erosion of soils is less than significant. Also refer to the Section 4.3, Air Quality, of this environmental document for further information on the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-19 October 2023 399 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Waterborne Erosion In addition to windborne erosion, the Project property and affected soils are subject to waterborne erosion which must be managed during and following Project development. The development site is crossed or affected by a series of braided streams and larger drainages transporting large volumes of sand and gravel that could impact the site during and following construction if not properly managed. Existing site drainage is somewhat affected by remnant diversions on the west end of the abandoned vineyard; otherwise, the site and drainages are in a largely natural condition flowing generally west to east. The Guadalupe Dike located along the northern Project property area is a training levee that diverts mountain runoff into the Guadalupe Chanel and terminating in the Dike No. 4 impound area west of the Project property. The Project grading will be performed in accordance with the most current Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ) to ensure that waterborne erosions of soils is minimized. It will identify the locations and types of construction activities requiring BMPs and other necessary compliance measures to prevent soil erosion and stormwater runoff pollution. The Project shall be required to prepare and implement a City approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) pursuant to Mitigation Measure GEO-10 and will ensure that impacts from waterborne soil erosion are less than significant. As stated above, post -development, the Project will include concrete or riprap-lined and hardened flood control levees on the west and south portions of the Project development site, as well as stormwater retention basins. Soils within the developed portions of the site will be stabilized by landscaping (including gravel and groundcovers, buildings, streets, drainage facilities, and paved areas throughout the property. This issue is discussed further in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. Impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. C. Located on geologic unit that is unstable, or become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading As discussed previously, in section a) iii., the Project property is not located in an area susceptible to liquefaction due to the lack of shallow groundwater. Although the potential for liquefaction, and subsequent effects (i.e., lateral spread, heaving and differential settling), is considered low at the Project property, development within the Project property will be required to comply with the current California Building Code (CBC) standards, City requirements, the recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Evaluation, and Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-5. With the implementation of regulatory requirements and mitigation measures, impacts of liquefaction, and the secondary effects of liquefaction, such as lateral spread, will be less than significant. See discussion a) iii., above. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-20 October 2023 400 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Landslides and Rockfalls As stated in discussion a) iv., above, the proposed residential and resort Project components will not be located immediately adjacent to the existing natural landforms. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-4 and GEO-6 through GEO-9 will reduce impacts of slope failure to less than significant levels. See discussion a) iv., above. Ground Subsidence Since the 1990s, increasing agricultural, domestic, and municipal groundwater withdrawal has lowered the groundwater table in Coachella Valley as much as 50 vertical feet, which in turn resulted in widespread land subsidence. Monitoring conducted by the USGS and CVWD shows that subsidence rates in the Coachella Valley have been increasing rapidly over the past several decades, especially during periods of overdraft of the basins. Between 1995 and 2010, water level records indicated that groundwater levels were the lowest in 2010. The majority of this measured subsidence occurred in the central portions of the City of La Quinta, north of Avenue 60, where up to two feet was recorded. Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar detection indicated that land -surface elevation changes within La Quinta ranged from 0 to approximately 1.3 inches. Based on the USGS and CVWD monitoring, subsidence has not occurred at the Project property. The Project property, located in the southern portion of La Quinta, is situated between bedrock and the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility. According to the Geotechnical Evaluation, the operation of the groundwater replenishment facility (developed mid-2009) attributed to the increased groundwater levels within the City of La Quinta. Water levels are beginning to increase in the confined aquifer partly as a result of the increased hydraulic pressure provided by the groundwater replenishment facility. The Project property's proximity to the groundwater replenishment facility reduces the likelihood of subsidence at the Project property. Additionally, the Project property's location near bedrock reduces the likelihood of subsidence to occur at the Project property. Per the Geotechnical Evaluation, bedrock is exposed along the northern perimeter and southwest corner of the Project property and consists of Mesozoic -age plutonic (granitic) rocks. Bedrock units present in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west include both Mesozoic -age granitic rock and Pre -Cenozoic -age granitic and metamorphic rocks. Subsidence does not occur in areas where bedrock is present because of its solid composition (no voids). Therefore, the Project's location between the bedrock areas makes subsidence not likely to occur at the Project property. Overall, the Project is not likely to experience subsidence due to the Project's location between the bedrock slopes and the groundwater replenishment facility. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-21 October 2023 401 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Collapse Soil collapse occurs in recently deposited sediments that accumulated in an arid or semi -arid environment. Young alluvial and wind -deposited sediments in the City may be locally susceptible to soil collapse due to their low density, rapid deposition in the desert environment, and the generally dry condition of the upper soils. Based on NMG's evaluation of the existing subsurface borings and laboratory data, the near -surface soil at the site generally consists of weathered, low density and/or porous material and undocumented fill material (associated with vineyard and flood control levee grading). This unsuitable soil is prone to significant soil collapse or consolidation and has poor bearing properties. NMG performed hydroconsolidation tests on two relatively undisturbed ring samples collected at depths of 20 to 30 feet. Hydroconsolidation potential of the samples, which can mitigate for low -cohesion soils, was considered to be moderate based on NMG's findings. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-5 will reduce impacts of soil collapse at the Project property to less than significant levels. See discussion a) iii., above. Off -Site Utility Field Improvements As previously stated, in discussion a) iii., above, the proposed off -site utility field is located on areas determined to have high liquefaction susceptibility. This off -site utility field areas are characterized by relatively flat topography and the sites are not located near slopes. Therefore, the offsite improvements will not be impacted by landslides or rockfalls. See discussion a) iv., above. Additional geotechnical evaluations will ensure that these utility sites include appropriate soil conditions, reducing impacts of liquefaction and soil collapse to less than significant levels. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and HD, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property Expansive soils contain a significant amount of clay particles which can give up water (shrink) or take on water (swell). The change in volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils, making them potentially hazardous. These soils can also be widely dispersed, occurring in both hillside areas and low-lying alluvial basins. The Geotechnical Evaluation concludes that the expansion potential is anticipated to generally range from "very low" to "low". The Project shall comply with the recommendations established within the Project -specific Geotechnical Evaluation to ensure the foundational safety of the Project site. The foundational design recommendations established in the Geotechnical Evaluation are reflected in Mitigation Measure GEO-2. Additionally, NMG Geotechnical recommends that additional laboratory Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-22 October 2023 402 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS testing be performed following completion of grading operations to determine the expansion potential of the near -surface soils. This is prescribed by Mitigation Measure GEO-10. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-2 and GEO-10, the impact of expansive soils will be less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water The Project does not include septic tanks or alternative water disposal systems. CVWD provides the City of La Quinta and the project vicinity with sewerage collection and treatment services. The Project proposes to extend existing CVWD sewer mains along Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street to the Project property. f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature While no previously recorded paleontological resources have been identified within the Project property and proposed off -site improvement areas, several are known to occur within 3 miles of the Project property from the Lake Cahuilla Beds and/or late Pleistocene alluvial deposits (Appendix G.2). The Project property crosses multiple geologic units, including alluvium, alluvial fans gravels, landslide deposits, and quartz diorite, as well as unmapped Lake Cahuilla beds underlying alluvial deposits at shallow depth. The Paleontological Report assessed the paleontological sensitivity of these units and assigned them BLM Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC) ranking as summarized in Table 4.7-1 (below). Table 4.7-1 Paleontological Potential of Geologic Units Underlying the Project Property Formation Abbreviation BLM PFYC Presence in the Project Area Low (PFYC 2) to High (PFYC 4); Across the majority of the Alluvium Qa increasing with depth surface of the project area Alluvial Fan Qf Low (PFYC 2) to Moderate (PFYC Southwest project area Gravels 3); increasing with depth Landslide Deposits Qls Low (PFYC 2) Southern margin of the project area Lake Cahuilla Beds - High (PFYC 4) Subsurface Quartz Diorite qdi Very Low (PFYC 1) Northwest project area Pleistocene alluvial deposits, known to contain paleontological resources within 3 miles, likely underlie the Project property, possibly as shallow as 5 feet. The alluvial deposits that are present at the surface within the Project property are too young to preserve fossils but increase in paleontological sensitivity in the subsurface. Less than 1 percent of the property excavation activities will impact sediments to Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-23 October 2023 403 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS maximum depths of greater than 40 feet below ground surface, including substantial grading, excavating, and trenching. No excavation is expected at a depth greater than 50 feet below ground surface. Ground -disturbing activities associated with Project construction would have the potential to impact geologic units of Moderate (PFYC 3) or High (PFYC 4) paleontological sensitivity, which could result in the damage or destruction of fossil resources should they occur in the Project site near the surface or at depth. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure GEO-12 is recommended to reduce and avoid impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant levels. 4.7.5 Cumulative Impacts Development in geologically active areas in the Coachella Valley and elsewhere in California is well regulated. A wide range of building codes and regulations discussed at length above help to ensure that cumulative impacts from major geotechnical effects and/or conditions will not be cumulatively considerable. The Project's contribution to geology and soils impacts will be cumulatively considerable before implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-12. Paleontological resources that have the potential to occur within or to be affected by the proposed on - site and off -site utility field development are largely limited to fossilized bivalves deposited by earlier stands of Ancient Lake Cahuilla. Extensive research and documentation has been conducted on these now well understood resources. The potential for other resources to be encountered during development is considered low. Therefore, cumulative impacts to paleontological resources from Project development will not be cumulatively considerable. 4.7.6 Mitigation Measures GEO-1 The Project developer shall implement the seismic design criteria and parameters, in accordance with ASCE 7-16 and 2019 CBC, as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. GEO-2 The design of foundation and slabs (including bearing pressure recommendations) shall be in conformance with the recommendations of the Project structural engineer and as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. GEO-3 Grading and excavations shall be performed in accordance with the City of La Quinta Code and regulations and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications set forth in the Geotechnical Evaluation. Clearing and grubbing of the site shall include removal of any pavement or concrete, turf, landscaping, miscellaneous trash and debris, and disposal of deleterious material offsite. The soil engineering properties of imported soil (if any) shall be evaluated and certified by the Project geologist for use at the development site. GEO-4 Unsuitable earth materials shall be removed prior to placement of compacted fill. Unsuitable materials at the site include undocumented fills and weathered alluvial fan deposits as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation and as otherwise directed by the Project geologist. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-24 October 2023 404 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Excavation and grading to carry Project -serving roadways over the Dike No. 4 levee for the proposed Avenue 62 and Madison Street extensions, as well the Jefferson Street extension over the Dike No. 2 levee, should bench into competent existing fills on the sides with minimal removals on the top (1 to 2 feet). Grading on the levee fill shall be performed under the direction and concurrence of the US Bureau of Reclamation and CVWD. GEO-5 Where project soils require, they shall be overexcavated during grading to be replaced with compacted fill, as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. The proposed grading is anticipated to expose cut and fill transitions at finish grade. Shallow fill areas and cut portions of lots should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill to provide a minimum of 4 feet of uniform fill cap over each lot. Streets should be overexcavated 2 feet below subgrade to provide uniform fill below the pavement section. Alternatively, and as recommended by the Project geologist, streets may be overexcavated 2 feet below the deepest utility to reduce the amount of oversize materials encountered and facilitate utility excavation/installation. GEO-6 Rockfall hazard analysis should be performed during the design phase if structures are planned within 100 feet of these hillsides (i.e., Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide) once plans are further developed to evaluate this hazard and provide site -specific mitigation recommendations (i.e., impact walls or berms/channels), as required. GEO-7 Slopes shall be engineered for stability, including during seismic events, to reduce potential slope failure hazards, as set forth in the Project geotechnical evaluation. GEO-8 Manufactured Slope Maintenance and Protection. To reduce the erosion and surficial slumping potential of the graded slopes, permanent manufactured slopes shall be protected from erosion by concrete lining, riprap, groundcover planting or other appropriate method (i.e., jute matting, polymer coating, etc.) as approved by the Project geologist. These measures shall be applied as soon as practicable. Drainage shall be designed and maintained to collect surface waters and direct them away from manufactured slopes and as required by the Project geologist. GEO-9 Structural setbacks, including those for retaining walls, shall be established as prescribed by the Project geotechnical engineer. GEO-10 The project proponent shall comply with the most current Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). Compliance with the CGP involves the development and implementation of a Project -specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is designed to reduce potential adverse impacts to surface water quality during the period of construction. The SWPPP may include, but is not limited to, the following BMPs: • Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-25 October 2023 405 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: watering of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non-stormwater Management: clear water diversion and dewatering; and • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management. GEO-11 Expansion Potential. The expansion potential of the on -site soils is low to very low. In accordance with the Project geotechnical evaluation recommendations, additional laboratory testing shall be performed following completion of grading operations to verify the expansion potential of the near -surface soils. GEO-12 A qualified professional paleontologist shall prepare a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan and a Worker's Environmental Awareness Program to train the construction crew, both to be implemented during development. 4.7.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-12, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking, seismic -related ground failure, ground subsidence, collapsible soils, corrosive soils, and paleontological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation measures will be applied as future projects are proposed within the project site, and the project design and construction of habitable structures must be per the recommendations of each project's Geotechnical Evaluation and Paleontological Reports, as well as the latest UBC and CBC as required bythe City Engineer. 4.7.B References 1. California Department of Conservation EQZapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. 2. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards Element, November 2013. 3. County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521, Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Section 4.9), County of Riverside, 2015. 4. Geotechnical Evaluation and Planning Study, Proposed Residential Development at Travertine, City of La Quinta, California, NMG Geotechnical, Inc., August 2021. 5. Land Subsidence in the Coachella Valley, USGS, November 2018 6. Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Travertine Development, SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. 7. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, CVWD, July 2016, https://www.cvwd.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/516. Travertine Draft EIR 4.7-26 October 2023 406 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.8.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to establish the Project environmental setting for purposes of greenhouse gas (GHG) conditions and as pertinent to the Coachella Valley, identify the significance of the Project's GHG emissions, resulting from construction and operation of the project, and to identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce any such potentially significant impacts. The GHG contributors, their descriptions and supporting analyses are based in part on the following: Federal Clean Air Act (CWA); Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2017; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book; and California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2019, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, 2021 Edition, California Air Resources Board; and Releases No. 18-37 & 19-35, California Air Resources Board Press Release, July 2018 and August 2019. At the project -specific level, the analytical and quantitative findings are based on the Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA) and Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), both dated January 31, 2023. The purpose of the GHGA was to evaluate project -related construction and operational emissions and determine the level of GHG impacts from construction and operation of the proposed Project. The GHGA methodology relied on CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 as the current and prescribed version of this software at the time of release of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). The AQand GHG Memorandum was prepared to ascertain operational GHG emissions using the more current version of CalEEMod (2022.1) that has been released since the NOP. As previously described in the Air Quality Section, CalEEMod utilizes widely accepted methodologies for estimating emissions. Sources of these methodologies and default data include but are not limited to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) AP-42 emission factors, California Air Resources Board (CARB) vehicle emission models, and studies commissioned by California agencies such as the California Energy Commission (CEC) and CalRecycle. The GHG emissions modeling and analysis also accounts for emissions generated from off -site improvements that will support the proposed development, including a 2.5-acre substation, up to nine domestic water wells, and street improvements. It is expected that the likely number of off -site well sites will be five, rather than nine, but the more conservative number is analyzed in the emissions modeling and are reflected in the data cited herein. These future off -site utilities will be developed within a planning area subject to programmatic -level evaluation in this document. The off -site utility field has been identified in consultation with the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and the City. The GHG emission quantities associated with the construction of off -site facilities have been calculated and included with the project -wide emission levels subsequently Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-1 October 2023 407 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS analyzed. The operational energy demand, and associated GHG and AQ emissions, for the project includes electricity required to transmit water to the Project. CVWD wells would serve the project, as well as other users of the CVWD system. Accordingly, only a portion of operational emissions from the wells is attributable to the project. The GHGA report referenced in this section is provided in Appendix H of this Draft EIR. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), greenhouse gases (GHG) are a group of gases that trap solar energy in the Earth's atmosphere and steadily increasing global land and ocean temperatures. Greenhouse gases include, but are not limited to, water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), ozone (03), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Carbon dioxide is the most abundant GHG while other GHGs are more potent pound for pound. Like greenhouse glass, carbon dioxide and other GHGs trap infrared radiation in the lower atmosphere and increase levels of water vapor in the atmosphere. Human activities (such as burning carbon -based fossil fuels) also generate water vapor and CO2 as byproducts, thereby increasing the level of atmospheric warming. Carbon dioxide -equivalence (CO2e) is a metric used to compare emissions and associated warming of various greenhouse gases. It is the mass of carbon dioxide that would produce the same estimated warming as a given mass of another greenhouse gas. Global Climate Change (GCC) is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, precipitation, and storms. GHGs are the result of both natural and human activities, including motor vehicle travel, air travel, consumption of fossil fuels for power generation, industrial processes, heating and cooling, landfills, and agriculture. Wildfire, both natural and human -caused, are also a major source of GHG emissions. The significant adverse effects of increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere have resulted in the adoption of governmental policies and regulations on federal, state and local levels that are intended to reduce GHG emissions by development projects, transportation and other activities. 4.8.2 Existing Conditions The Project property encompasses approximately 855 acres of undeveloped land, of which, approximately 220 acres were previously cleared to support grape production (vineyard operations) but have been fallow for many years. Therefore, the undeveloped property does not include existing operations or other conditions considered a source of GHG emissions. 4.8.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-2 October 2023 408 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Clean Air Act The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants. Clean Air Act (CAA) has served as the primary basis for federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly through CAA section 111, which covers emissions regulation for stationary facility sources. Under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is authorized to set New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from new, modified, and reconstructed fossil fuel -fired power plants. In West Virginia v. EPA, the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling limiting EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions through broad rules capable of exerting significant changes in the industry of electricity generation. The court decision found that Congress did not give EPA the authority to adopt a regulatory scheme at a magnitude and significance to incur economywide changes, such as a generation shift. EPA was found to lack the authority to require coal-fired power plants to shift to wind, solar, and other cleaner fuel sources; however, the court did not broadly eliminate EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or pursue reductions under section 111 or any other section of the CAA. State California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which required that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This reduction was to be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions beginning in 2012. To implement the cap, AB 32 directs CARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources. In November 2007, CARB completed its estimates of 1990 GHG levels and established 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) as the total statewide aggregated greenhouse gas 1990 emissions level and the 2020 emissions limit or target. The California GHG Emissions Inventory and Trends discussion provided below summarizes the State's progress in reducing GHGs based on information collected through various AB 32 programs. Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) Senate Bill 32 (2016) adds Section 38566 to the Health and Safety Code and requires that CARB ensure statewide GHG emissions meet the 40% reduction target no later than December 31, 2030. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-3 October 2023 409 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS CARB Scoping Plan CARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) contains measures designed to reduce the State's emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32 and SB 32. As noted, the 2020 GHG emissions limit is 431 MMTCO2e. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update establishes a new emissions limit of 260 MMTCO2e for the year 2030, which corresponds to a 40% decrease in 1990 levels by 2030. The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple GHG emission sectors and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target —each sector has a different emission reduction target. Most of the measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. Key elements include expanding and strengthening building and appliance standards, achieving 35% renewables, cap and trade program, GHG reduction targets, and incentives and mitigation measures. 2022 CARB Scoping Plan On December 15, 2022, CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan). The 2022 Scoping Plan builds on the 2017 Scoping Plan as well as the requirements set forth by AB 1279, which directs the state to become carbon neutral no later than 2045. To achieve this statutory objective, the 2022 Scoping Plan lays out how California can reduce GHG emissions by 85% below 1990 levels and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The Scoping Plan scenario to do this is to "deploy a broad portfolio of existing and emerging fossil fuel alternatives and clean technologies, and align with statutes, Executive Orders, Board direction, and direction from the governor." The 2022 Scoping Plan sets one of the most aggressive approaches to reach carbon neutrality in the world. Unlike the 2017 Scoping Plan, CARB advocates for compliance with a local GHG reduction strategy (CAP) consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5. The key elements of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan focus on transportation - the regulations that will impact this sector are adopted and enforced by CARB on vehicle manufacturers and outside the jurisdiction and control of local governments. As stated in the Plan's executive summary: "The major element of this unprecedented transformation is the aggressive reduction of fossil fuels wherever they are currently used in California, building on and accelerating carbon reduction programs that have been in place for a decade and a half. That means rapidly moving to zero -emission transportation; electrifying the cars, buses, trains, and trucks that now constitute California's single largest source of planet -warming pollution." "[A]pproval of this plan catalyzes a number of efforts, including the development of new regulations as well as amendments to strengthen regulations and programs already in place, not just at CARB but across state agencies." Under the 2022 Scoping Plan, the State will lead efforts to meet the 2045 carbon neutrality goal through implementation of the following objectives: Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-4 October 2023 410 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS • Reimagine roadway projects that increase VMT in a way that meets community needs and reduces the need to drive. • Double local transit capacity and service frequencies by 2030. • Complete the High -Speed Rail (HSR) System and other elements of the intercity rail network by 2040. • Expand and complete planned networks of high -quality active transportation infrastructure. • Increase availability and affordability of bikes, e-bikes, scooters, and other alternatives to light - duty vehicles, prioritizing needs of underserved communities. • Shift revenue generation for transportation projects away from the gas tax into more durable sources by 2030. • Authorize and implement roadway pricing strategies and reallocate revenues to equitably improve transit, bicycling, and other sustainable transportation choices. • Prioritize addressing key transit bottlenecks and other infrastructure investments to improve transit operational efficiency over investments that increase VMT. • Develop and implement a statewide transportation demand management (TDM) framework with VMT mitigation requirements for large employers and large developments. • Prevent uncontrolled growth of autonomous vehicle (AV) VMT, particularly zero -passenger miles. • Channel new mobility services towards pooled use models, transit complementarity, and lower VMT outcomes. • Establish an integrated statewide system for trip planning, booking, payment, and user accounts that enables efficient and equitable multimodal systems. • Provide financial support for low-income and disadvantaged Californians' use of transit and new mobility services. • Expand universal design features for new mobility services. • Accelerate infill development in existing transportation -efficient places and deploy strategic resources to create more transportation -efficient locations. • Encourage alignment in land use, housing, transportation, and conservation planning in adopted regional plans (RTP/SCS and RHNA) and local plans (e.g., general plans, zoning, and local transportation plans). • Accelerate production of affordable housing in forms and locations that reduce VMT and affirmatively further fair housing policy objectives. • Reduce or eliminate parking requirements (and/or enact parking maximums, as appropriate) and promote redevelopment of excess parking, especially in infill locations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-5 October 2023 411 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS • Preserve and protect existing affordable housing stock and protect existing residents and businesses from displacement and climate risk. The 2022 Scoping Plan lays out the framework to achieve the AB 1279 target of 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 and identifies a need to accelerate the 2030 target to 48 percent below 1990 levels. Senate Bill 375 SB 375, signed into law in September 2008, aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocations. The act requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), such as SCAG, to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) that prescribes land use allocation in that MPO's regional transportation plan (RTP). CARB, in consultation with MPOs, provided regional reduction targets for GHGs for the years 2020 and 2035. SB 100 The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018, otherwise known as Senate Bill 100 (SB 100, De Leon), set a 2045 goal of powering all retail electricity sold in California and state agency electricity needs with renewable and zero -carbon resources, such as solar and wind energy that do not emit climate -altering greenhouse gases. SB 100 also updated the state's Renewables Portfolio Standard to ensure that by 2030 at least 60 percent of California's electricity is renewable and required the Energy Commission, Public Utilities Commission and Air Resources Board to use programs under existing laws to achieve 100 percent clean electricity and issue a joint policy report on SB 100 by 2021 and every four years thereafter. AB 1493 California AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA's denial of an implementation waiver. The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011. The standards were projected to result in about a 22% reduction compared with the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013-2016) standards will result in about a 30% reduction. The updated regulations are projected to reduce GHGs from new cars by 34% from 2016 levels by 2025. California GHG Emissions Inventory and Trends California's annual statewide GHG emission inventory is a relevant tool for tracking California's progress in reducing GHGs and achieving the statewide GHG target. The GHG inventory relies on data collected through various California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) programs. On July 11, 2018, CARB announced in a press release (No. 18-37) that greenhouse gas pollution in California fell below 1990 levels for the first time since emissions peaked in 2004, an achievement roughly equal to taking 12 million cars off the road or saving 6 billion gallons of gasoline a year. Moreover, according to the CARB report Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-6 October 2023 412 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS on California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017 (published in 2019), which tracks the trends of GHG emissions, California's GHG emissions have followed a declining trend between 2007 and 2017. In 2017, emissions from GHG emitting activities statewide were 424 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMTCO2e), 5 MMTCO2e lower than 2016 levels and 7 MMTCO2e below the 2020 GHG Limit of 431 MMTCO2e. The data also show that for the first time since California started to track GHG emissions, the state power grid used more energy from zero-GHG sources like solar and wind power than from electrical generation powered by fossil fuels. On July 28, 2021, CARB announced via Press Release No. 21-34 that state Greenhouse Gas Inventory shows emissions have continued to drop below 2020 target, which is a return to the 1990 GHG levels. The target was achieved four years ahead of schedule in 2016. Wildfires are known to have served a natural function in California's diverse ecosystems for millennia, such as facilitating germination of seeds for certain tree species, replenishing soil nutrients, clearing dead biomass to make room for living trees to grow, and reducing accumulation of fuel that leads to high - intensity wildfires. However, fire also impacts human health and safety, and releases greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other air pollutants, including those that contribute to ozone formation. In recent years the magnitude and intensity of wildfires have increased across California. CARB works with other State agencies to develop an ecosystem carbon inventory for natural and working lands. This inventory quantifies the carbon stored in the State's forests, soils, and other natural lands. Senate Bill 901 (2018) directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop a baseline estimate of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from California's natural fire regime that reflects conditions before modern fire suppression (i.e., before 1910). In response, CARB has prepared a draft report, titled California's Historical Fire Activity Before Modern Fire Suppression, dated November 2021. The report indicates that wildfires that occurred between 2000 and 2020 emitted, on average, 19 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. This equates to an average of 24 metric tons of carbon dioxide per acre burned. The State's 2022 Scoping Plan recognizes that of the twenty largest wildfires ever recorded in California, nine occurred in 2020 and 2021. The worst wildfire season in California's recorded history was in 2018, with over 24,226 structures damaged or destroyed and over 100 lives lost. The largest wildfire season ever recorded in state history was in 2020, where more than 4.3 million acres burned, albeit at different intensity and with varying ecological impacts, and over 112 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted into the atmosphere. Wildfires have always been part of California's natural ecology and will continue to be. However, changes to the state's climate and precipitation expands the footprint of wildfire threat, severity, and intensity, with one quarter of California —more than 25 million acres —now classified as being under very high or extreme fire threat. The impacts of wildfire smoke have been linked to respiratory infections, cardiac arrests, low birth weight, mental health conditions, and exacerbated asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-7 October 2023 413 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AB 1279 AB 1279 or the "California Climate Crisis Act, declared the policy of the state both to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85% below the 1990 levels. The law required the California Air Resources Board to work with relevant state agencies to ensure that updates to the scoping plan identify and recommend measures to achieve these policy goals and to identify and implement a variety of policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies in California. S-3-05 In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order S-3-05 establishing various GHG reduction targets for the State of California, including, GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. B-30-15 In 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-30-15 to establish a new interim statewide greenhouse gas emission reduction target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to ensure California meets its target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. All state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of greenhouse gas emissions were required to implement measures, pursuant to statutory authority, to achieve reductions of greenhouse gas emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets. At the time, this was considered the most aggressive benchmark enacted by any government in North America to reduce dangerous carbon emissions over the next decade and a half. N-79-20 In 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-79-20, setting new statewide goals for phasing out gasoline -powered cars and trucks in California, including a zero -emission requirement for all in -state sales of new passenger cars and trucks by 2035. Similarly, under this Order, 100% of in- state sales of medium- and heavy-duty trucks and busses are to be zero -emission by 2045, where feasible; and 100% of off -road vehicles and equipment sales are to be zero -emission by 2035, where feasible. Regional and Local Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-8 October 2023 414 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Southern California Association of Governments 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS) Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) consisting of six counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura), and 191 cities, including the City of La Quinta as a member agency. SCAG is responsible for developing long-range transportation plans and sustainable communities strategies for the region in accordance with federal and state law and planning requirements, including but not limited to federal Clean Air Act ambient air quality standards and ambient air quality and greenhouse gas emissions reductions standards and targets, respectively adopted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The centerpiece tool of SCAG's planning work is the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which is updated and adopted every four years. The current 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (also known as Connect SoCal 2020) was approved by U.S. Department of Transportation for transportation conformity purposes in May 2020 and adopted in its entirety on September 3, 2020. On October 30, 2020, CARB certified that the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would meet the applicable 2035 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target for automobiles and light trucks as established by CARB in 2018, specifically, a 19 percent per capita reduction by 2035 relative to 2005 levels. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS represents the vision for Southern California's future through 2045, including policies, strategies, and projects. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS details how the region will address its transportation and land use challenges and leverage opportunities in order to support attainment of applicable federal ambient air quality standards and achieve state's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS built on the 2016 version to reflect the most recent policy directions and will continue to undergo changes every four years to address emerging issues and policies. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) component of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is designed to comply with the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from passenger vehicle use through integrated transportation, housing, and land use planning. SCAG's 2020 SCS estimates an 8 percent and a 19 percent decrease in GHG per capita emissions from light -duty passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035, respectively, compared to 2005. The reduction targets and associated strategies were reviewed and accepted by CARB in their October 2020 approval. It is important to note that SCAG does not have authority to implement individual transportation projects in the RTP, nor does the SCS supersede the land use authority of cities and counties in the region. Specific projects and policies are implemented by local jurisdictions, state agencies, and other agencies. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) SCAQMD is the agency responsible for air quality planning and regulation in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). In 2008, SCAQMD formed a Working Group to identify GHG emissions thresholds for land use projects that could be used by local lead agencies in the SCAB. The Working Group developed several Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-9 October 2023 415 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS different options that are contained in the SCAQMD Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold, that could be applied by lead agencies. The working group has not provided additional guidance since release of the interim guidance in 2008. The current interim thresholds consist of a tiered approach that includes exemptions, GHG reduction plan consistency including consistency with adopted screening values, which are discussed in detail in Appendix H of this EIR. City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan In 2012, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan was prepared as part of the City's General Plan Update, drawing input from utility providers and various technical studies to conduct the community wide and government specific greenhouse gas inventory. The inventory established a baseline year of 2005, from which it projected future year emission levels. The reduction targets identified in the Plan are consistent with AB 32 and a goal to reduce CO2e emissions to 10 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The La Quinta GHG Reduction Plan established policies and programs to achieve the reduction targets. At a minimum new development is required to adhere to the latest building code standards, which will increase energy efficiency and use of passive and active design features intended to benefit the overall operating efficiency of new buildings. Transportation is the largest emitter of GHGs; therefore, the City has established specific goals, policies, and programs to reduce emissions from the transportation sector at a local level. The policies and programs are intended to reduce dependence on personal motor vehicles and encourage alternative modes of transportation, such as public transit, cycling and walking. For example, implementation measure New Development (ND) 6, regarding transportation, requires that all new development in the City accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists by (1) including facilities for safe and convenient bicycle parking for non-resident and multi -family development, and (2) considering access routes for pedestrians and bicycles. The project is anticipated to conform to this implementation measure by providing trail linkages between the project and surrounding trails, including bike lanes throughout community, such as Class II bike lanes located along both sides of Jefferson Street. Bike lanes will be striped to a width of 8 feet to accommodate golf carts and NEVs. As described in the Transportation section, the proposed project will provide a robust network of bike paths, pedestrian ways, multipurpose trails, bicycle lanes and golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) lanes. Although there is no bus service in the Project study area, transit service is reviewed and updated by the SunLine Transit Agency periodically to address ridership, budget and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-10 October 2023 416 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 4.8.4 Project Impacts Thresholds of Significance The following thresholds or criteria are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effect. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, development of the Travertine Specific Plan would have a significant effect on greenhouse gas emissions if it will: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Methodology As previously introduced, the air quality findings are based primarily on the Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA) and the Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), dated January 31, 2023. The GHGA scope evaluated the project -related construction and operational emissions to determine the level of GHG impacts from construction and operation the proposed project. The quantification of GHG emissions from the proposed Project utilized CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 as the current and prescribed version of this software at the time of release of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). The AQ and GHG Memorandum was subsequently prepared to ascertain operational GHG emissions using the more current version of CalEEMod (2022.1) that was released since the NOP. The said technical studies accounted for emissions generated from off -site improvements that will support the proposed development, including a substation, domestic water wells, and street improvements, as depicted in the Project description. Discussion on Establishment of Significance Thresholds The EIR includes both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis of the significance of the project's GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.4, the focus of the analysis is on the project's effect on climate change. Further, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15144 and 15145, the City has used its best efforts to find out and disclose all that it reasonably can, while avoiding speculation. The analysis considers the project's reasonably foreseeable incremental contribution of the project's emissions to the effects of climate change. For purposes of the quantitative analysis, the EIR relies on an efficiency metric developed by the SCAQM D. Based on the Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), prepared by Urban Crossroads on October 13, 2021 and January 31, 2023, the project could result in 3,250 new residents and 450 Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-11 October 2023 417 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS employees for a total service population (SP) of 3,700 at project buildout. The SCAQMD defines the service population as the total number of residents and employees associated with a project. The 2008 Scoping Plan identified that based on the GHG emissions inventories for the state, the people of California generate approximately 14 tons of GHG emissions per capita and would need to reduce annual emissions to approximately 10 tons per capita in order to meet the GHG reduction target of AB 32. The SCAQMD has proposed targets for project -level and plan -level analysis. At the September 2010 working group meeting the SCAQMD recommended a project -level efficiency target of 4.8 MTCO2e/SP. SCAQMD's threshold is a metric for assessing compliance with AB 32 by using an efficiency threshold value of 4.8 MTCO2e/yr attributable to residential and commercial sectors (non -industrial) that can be scaled or translated to a local project efficiency. This screening threshold is used by numerous cities in the South Coast AQMD jurisdiction to assess the significance of GHG emissions from land use projects and is described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans ("SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold"). The SCAQMD's threshold is further based on the major sources of GHG emissions that exist within the South Coast AQMD air basin. Although the SCAQMD's draft significance criteria have not been formally adopted, the City has determined that the SCAQMD's project -level efficiency threshold methodology can be used as a quantitative measure of the significance of the Project's GHG emissions if updated consistent with the state's current GHG emissions reductions targets. As previously noted, the recently adopted 2022 Scoping Plan identifies a reduction target of 48% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 85% below 1990 levels by 2045. For analysis purposes herein, the SP threshold for the Project's buildout year of 2031 was calculated by linear interpolation between the 2020 target of 4.8 MTCO2e/yr and the 2045 target of 0.72 MTCO2e/yr. The City has conservatively chosen 2045 as the time -frame for the analysis in consideration of the nature of the project -- a land use plan with an expected buildout date of 2031-- and the State's long-term climate goals and strategies, as reflected in AB 1279 and the 2022 Scoping Plan. In addition to the quantitative approach described above, the EIR also includes a qualitative analysis of the significance of the Project's GHG emissions. The qualitative analysis considers whether the Project complies with the City's GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy. Under this approach, the Project's contribution of GHG emissions is determined to be less than significant if the Project complies with the applicable regulations or requirements of the City's GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy. A discussion of Project consistency with the 2020-2045 SCAG RTP/SCS and CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan is also provided below for informational purposes. Project Design Features (PDF) Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-12 October 2023 418 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS The proposed project will incorporate a variety of energy -saving and sustainable design features and operational programs. As described in the Energy section and in accordance with the SPA, the project will incorporate the installation of green roofs and solar panels on buildings within the community (SPA, Section 1.6, pg. 1-10); will consider the solar orientation of the buildings to reduce impact of the development with natural environment (SPA, Section 3.4, pg. 3-3); will implement passive and active solar systems to take advantage and consider the year -around abundant sunshine (SPA, Chapter 6, pg. 6-2); and will ensure the placement of structures to consider the environmental conditions including sun orientation and prevailing winds (SPA Chapter 3, pg. 3-1). The Project also incorporates the following design features and attributes promoting energy efficiency and sustainability. Because these features/attributes are integral to the Project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they are not considered to be mitigation measures. • To reduce water demands and associated energy use, subsequent development proposals within the project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor and outdoor water usage, consistent with the current CalGreen Building Code performance standards (section 4.303.1) for residential and non- residential land uses, achieved in part through the schedule of plumbing fixtures and fixture fittings that will reduce indoor use and efficient irrigation systems for outdoor use. • In order to reduce the amount of waste disposed at landfills, the Project would be required to implement a 50% waste diversion as required by AB 939 and analyzed in the Utilities section. a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment Project implementation would result in construction -phase and operational GHG emissions associated with the on -site and off -site improvements and uses. The period of construction -related GHG emissions will be short-termbut their adverse effects will persist, while operational emissions will continue to occur throughout the life of the project. All of the project's construction activities, including construction of off -site utilities, will contribute to increased atmospheric GHG levels. The construction schedule utilized in the analysis is based on a "worst -case" (most intense) development scenario. Should construction commence or occur any time after the indicated dates, emission factors for construction are expected to be the same or decrease due to the emissions regulations becoming more stringent for mobile sources, area, and energy sources. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines. The duration of construction activity was generally based on CalEEMod defaults and the opening year of each respective phase and are set forth in detail in Appendix H of this EIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-13 October 2023 419 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Table 4.8-1 Construction Duration Phase Start Date End Date Phase A Grading Activities (Crushing, Madison Avenue with Water Line, Grading & Tank Construction, Avenue 62 with Water Line, Well Construction, Substation Construction) 07/01/2023 07/01/2025 Phase B Grading Activities 01/01/2024 03/30/2028 Phase 1(2026-2029) 07/01/2025 12/11/2028 Phase 2(2029-2031) 01/01/2029 12/13/2030 Phase 3(2031-2033) 01/01/2031 12/28/2032 Refer to Table 3-2 (Construction Duration) in the GHGA report for detailed construction duration information. GHG emissions resulting from project -related construction activities occurring on- and off -site were quantified and amortized over the life of the project using SCAQMD's recommended methodology. Per the SCAQMD Methodology, this process involved calculating the total GHG emissions from construction activities, then dividing that quantity by a 30-year project life, then adding that quantity to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. The amortized construction emissions are presented in Table 4.8-2. Table 4.8-2 Ammortized Annual Construction Emissions Emissions (MT/yr) CO2 CH4 N20 Total CO2e Total Construction Emissions 26,902.67 5.93 0.04 26,792.06 Amortized Construction Emissions (MTCO2e) 896.76 0.20 0.00 893.07 Note: CalEEMod reports the most common GHGs emitted which include CO2, CH4, and N20. These GHGs are then converted into the CO2e by multiplying the individual GHG by the GWP. Operational Emissions Operational activities associated with the proposed project will result in emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 from the following primary sources: Area Source, Energy Source, Mobile Source, Water Supply/Treatment/Distribution, and Solid Waste. These sources are summarized below: Area Source Emissions Landscape Maintenance Equipment: Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, hedge trimmers and similar equipment, as well as haul vehicles used to maintain the landscaping of the project. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in CalEEMod. Energy Source Emissions Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-14 October 2023 420 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Combustion emissions associated with Natural Gas and Electricity: GHGs are emitted from buildings as a result of activities for which electricity and natural gas are typically used as energy sources. Combustion of fossil fuels emits CO2 and other GHGs directly into the atmosphere; these emissions are considered direct emissions associated with a building. GHGs are also emitted during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels; these emissions are considered to be indirect emissions. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEMod default parameters were used. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity. The 2019 version of Title 24 was adopted by the CEC and became effective on January 1, 2020. The CEC anticipates that residential buildings will use approximately 53% less energy and nonresidential buildings will use approximately 30% less energy. Moreover, the project will continue benefiting from energy code standards for future development, which encourage energy efficient approaches to building decarbonization, including the benefits of photovoltaic and battery storage systems and other demand flexible technology to work in combinations with heat pumps to enable California buildings to be responsive to climate change. Title 24 requirements also strengthen ventilation standards to improve indoor air quality, as the state progresses toward the goal of 100 percent clean carbon neutrality by midcentury. Mobile Source Emissions The project related operational air quality impacts derive primarily from vehicle trips generated by the project. Trip characteristics available from the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Phasing Analysis report were utilized in this analysis. Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution Indirect GHG emissions result from the production of electricity used to convey, treat and distribute water and wastewater. The amount of electricity required to convey, treat and distribute water depends on the volume of water as well as the sources of the water. CalEEMod default parameters were used to estimate GHG emissions associated with water supply, treatment and distribution for the project scenario. Solid Waste Residential land uses will result in the generation and disposal of solid waste. A large percentage of this waste will be diverted from landfills by a variety of means, such as reducing the amount of waste generated, recycling, and/or composting. The remainder of the waste not diverted will be disposed of at a landfill. GHG emissions from landfills are associated with the anaerobic breakdown of material. GHG Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-15 October 2023 421 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS emissions associated with the disposal of solid waste associated with the proposed project were calculated by CalEEMod using default parameters. Emissions Summary As shown on Table 4.8-3, the project would result in 5.05 MTCO2e/SP/Yr compared to the threshold of 2.41 MTCO2e/SP/Yr for 2031 and thus would exceed the SCAQMD/City's screening threshold in 2031. In 2045, the total GHG emissions from the project would translate to 4.39 MTCO2e/SP/Yr., which would exceed the applicable threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP/Yr. The total GHG levels include amortized emissions associated with on- and off -site improvements. Although the emission levels solely associated with the off -site construction activities do not reach or exceed the applicable GHG thresholds, when combined with other project emissions, they contribute to the project -wide exceedance. As such, project -related emissions are potentially significant. Table 4.8-3 Project GHG Emissions Summary Amortized Construction and Annual Operational Emissions in 2031 Emission Source Emissions (MT/yr) CO2 CH4 N20 Total CO2e Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 896.76 0.20 0.00 893.07 Mobile 10,664 0.30 0.46 965.70 Area 287 0.01 < 0.005 6,760.15 Energy 3,759.00 0.40 0.03 7,809.22 Water 117.00 1.68 0.04 577.61 Waste 81.50 8.14 0.00 1,675.64 Refrigerants 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total CO2e (All Sources) 18,681.38 Service Population 3,700 Total CO2e/Service Population 5.05 Screening Threshold (CO2e) 2.41 Threshold Exceeded? YES Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-16 October 2023 422 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Table 4.8-4 Project GHG Emissions Summary Amortized Construction and Annual Operational Emissions in 2045 With Mitigation Emission Source Emissions (MT/yr) CO2 CH4 N20 R Total CO2E Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 896.76 2.00E-01 0.00E+00 N/A 893.07 Mobile Source 10,664 0.30 0.46 1.22 10,811 Area Source 287 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 287 Energy Source 3,759.00 0.40 0.03 0.00 3,777.00 Water 117.00 1.68 0.04 0.00 171.00 Waste 81.50 8.14 0.00 0.00 285.00 Refrigerants 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.40 26.40 Total CO2E (All Sources) 16,251.07 Service Population 3,700 Total COZe/Service Population 4.39 Screening Threshold 0.72 Threshold Exceeded? YES Mitigation Measure GHG-1 Annual GHG Reduction With Mitigation Measure GHG-1 13,624 Total CO2e/Service Population After Mitigation Measure GHG-1 0.71 Screening Threshold 0.72 Threshold Exceeded After Mitigation? NO The proposed project is anticipated to result in annual CO2e emissions that exceed the most conservative threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP/Yr. This threshold is based on a linear interpolation between the 2020 target of 4.8 MTCO2e/Yr and the 2045 target of 0.72 MTCO2e/Yr. As such, the Project's target for per capita GHG efficiency in 2045 is 0.72 MTCO2e/yr. Thus, project -related emissions are potentially significant. In order to reduce GHG emissions below the quantitative significance threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/Yr, the Project will rely on all feasible on -site GHG reduction matters, as well as off -site measures in the form of carbon offsets. As shown on Table 4.8-4, after implementation of MM GHG-1, which contemplates the purchase of carbon credits, GHG emissions are reduced to 0.71 MTCO2e per SP per year, which is less than the applicable threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e per SP per year. Mitigation Measures GHG-2 through GHG-11 would contribute to the project's energy efficiency and GHG reductions, but those reductions are not directly quantified toward the GHG reductions. Based on the current calculations, if the project pursued the 2045 target of 0.72 MTCO2e/yr, the project would require approximately 13,624 credits per year to reach the efficiency level. The 13,624 credits Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-17 October 2023 423 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS would reduce the total annual emissions from 16,251.07 MTCO2e/yr to approximately 2,664, which, when divided by the service population of 3,700, would achieve the target of 0.71 MTCO2e/yr. The current GHG emissions calculations do not take credit for future vehicle emissions reduction standards that may be implemented by CARB and that would translate to future GHG reductions. b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases GHG emissions reduction plans, policies and regulations applicable to the project include: the City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. As discussed above, the Project is proposed within the plan boundaries of the Southern California Association of Governments 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS). The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the 2017 and 2022 CARB Scoping Plan were not adopted for purpose of reducing the Project's emissions of greenhouse gases. However, a discussion of project consistency with the recently adopted 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the 2022 Scoping Plan is also provided for informational purposes and to address how the Project interacts with the policies and programs contained in these state and regional planning documents. City Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Consistency In 2012, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan was prepared as part of the City's General Plan Update, drawing input from utility providers and various technical studies to conduct the community wide and government specific greenhouse gas inventory. The inventory established a baseline year of 2005, from which it projected future year emission levels. The reduction targets identified in the Plan are consistent with AB 32 and a goal to reduce CO2e emissions to 10 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The La Quinta GHG Reduction Plan established policies and programs to achieve the reduction targets. At a minimum, new development is required to adhere to the latest building code standards, which will increase energy efficiency and use of passive and active design features intended to benefit the overall operating efficiency of new buildings. The proposed project will comply with this requirement by adhering to the applicable building code standards. Additional review of consistency is provided below. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-18 October 2023 424 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Table 4.8-5 City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures for New Development ND-1: Encourage and promote that Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed and all new commercial and residential constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures, as development achieve energy applicable to reduce energy consumption. The proposed efficiency and incorporate Project includes energy efficient field lighting and fixtures that sustainable design principles that meet the current Title 24 Standards throughout the Project exceed Green Building Code Site and would be a modern development with energy efficient requirements. boilers, heaters, and air conditioning systems. Examples of these elements are found in Sections 1.6, 3.4, 6.0 and 3.0 of the SPA. Refer to the Energy section for additional detail. The Project will install water -efficient plumbing fixtures, water - efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls for common area landscape irrigation, and use drought -tolerant plants in landscape design, as well as install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, Energy Star appliances, and tankless water heaters. ND-2: Work towards carbon Consistent. While the Project does not itself achieve carbon neutrality for all new buildings. neutrality, it has to the degree feasible reduced GHG emissions Carbon neutral buildings achieve a through on -site and off -site measures, consistent with ND-2, net zero emission of GHGs through and does not impede the City's carbon neutrality goals. The design measures, onsite renewable, Project is also one of several new development projects and offsets. currently considered by the City. The Project will, therefore, not impede the City's goal of attaining carbon neutrality for 755,000 square feet of new development between 2020 and 2035. ND-3: Encourage all new Consistent. The Project would use energy from Imperial development to meet 50% of energy Irrigation District (IID), which has committed to diversify its demand through onsite solar or portfolio of energy sources by increasing energy from wind other non-polluting source. and solar sources. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct IID energy source diversification efforts. Further IID states that they have met and exceeded all RPS requirements to date. The project will install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and Energy Star appliances. ND-4: Encourage all new Consistent. The Project's mix of resort and residential uses development to minimize vehicle could provide for a potential reduction in vehicle trips and trips. miles traveled. The proposed sidewalk connections and bike trails would minimize barriers to access and interconnectivity that would translate to vehicle trip reductions compared to single -use development patterns. ND-5: Require that new commercial Not consistent. The City of La Quinta is currently served by the development include provisions for SunLine Transit Agency, but there is no bus service currently Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-19 October 2023 425 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS bus stops and scheduled transit serving the project study area. Transit service is reviewed and services from SunLine transit where updated by the SunLine Transit Agency periodically to address available. ridership, budget and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate and as determined by SunLine. The project's commercial uses are designed in a manner that will not interfere with scheduled bus service, should such service be made available. Although the project is found to not have impacts to SunLine Services or facilities, it can't directly effectuate new routes to be implemented without SunLine's decision -making process. Therefore, the project is not directly consistent with this measure. ND-6: Require that new Consistent. The project will include facilities for bicycle development accommodate circulation and parking. pedestrian and bicyclists. ND-7: Encourage all new Consistent: The project will comply with all applicable solid development to utilize materials that waste statutes, policies and guidelines, including the consist of recycled materials and are mandatory commercial and residential recycling requirements recyclable. of Assembly Bill 341. ND-8: Consider the provision for the Consistent: The Project will comply with Title 6, Health and requirement of onsite composting Sanitation, Chapter 6.04 (Solid Waste Collection and Disposal) facilities. of the City's Municipal Code, which covers the composting regulations for commercial businesses and residential generators. ND-9: Encourage new commercial Consistent: The Project will comply with all applicable solid development to prepare an waste statutes, policies and guidelines, including those that operational plan to minimize waste. involve waste reductions. ND-10: Work with the County in Not Applicable: This measure appears to be applicable to the developing a fee program for City and County operations. methane capture to fund the development of methane capture facilities at landfills utilized by the City. ND-11: Encourage convenient, Consistent: The project will incorporate accessible waste accessible, and easy disposal disposal locations applicable to the common and resort areas. opportunities. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-20 October 2023 426 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Consistency with the Southern California Association of Governments 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS) As previously introduced, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) consisting of six counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura), and 191 cities, including the City of La Quinta as a member agency. SCAG is responsible for developing long-range transportation plans and sustainable strategies for the region in accordance with federal and state law and planning requirements, including but not limited to federal Clean Air Act ambient air quality standards and ambient air quality and greenhouse gas emissions reductions standards and targets, respectively adopted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Pursuant to state law (SB 375) SCAG is required to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy which identifies plans and policies that will facilitate the SCAG region's attainment of state -mandated, region -specific GHG emissions reduction targets. The centerpiece tool of SCAG's planning work is the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which is updated and adopted every four years. The current 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (also known as Connect SoCal 2020) was approved by U.S. Department of Transportation for transportation conformity purposes in May 2020 and adopted in its entirety on September 3, 2020. On October 30, 2020, CARB officially determined that the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS would meet the applicable 2035 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target for automobiles and light trucks as established by CARB in 2018, specifically, a 19 percent per capita reduction by 2035 relative to 2005 levels. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS represents the vision for Southern California's future through 2045, including policies, strategies, and projects. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS details how the region will address its transportation and land use challenges and leverage opportunities in order to support attainment of applicable federal ambient air quality standards and achieve state's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets. The 2020-204S RTP/SCS built on the 2016 version to reflect the most recent policy directions and will continue to undergo changes every four years to address emerging issues and policies. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) component of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is designed to comply with the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from passenger vehicle use through integrated transportation, housing, and land use planning. SCAG's 2020 SCS estimates an 8 percent and a 19 percent decrease in GHG per capita emissions from light -duty passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035, respectively, compared to 2005. The reduction targets and associated strategies were reviewed and accepted by CARB in their October 2020 approval. As evaluated in the Population and Housing Section, the proposed development of 1,200 dwelling units included in the Project would potentially translate to approximately 3,250 new residents, but 2,201 fewer people than the adopted Travertine and Green Specific Plan. At this scale, the estimated Project population has been found to not result or contribute to an exceedance of the City's 2035 and SCAG's 2040 or 2045 population forecasts. The project would be consistent with the City and regional population growth projections. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-21 October 2023 427 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Priority Growth and Neighborhood Mobility Areas The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS identifies Priority Growth Areas (PGAs) as locations for newly proposed development based on established criteria (e.g., infrastructure, location, market). PGAs include designated job centers, transit priority areas, high quality transit areas (HQTAs), livable corridors, spheres of influence, and neighborhood mobility areas (NMAs). SCAG estimates that although PGAs only account for approximately 4 percent of the region's total land, they are expected to accommodate approximately 64 percent of the forecasted growth and 74 percent of the forecasted employment growth between 2016 and 2045. New development in PGAs is generally expected to provide opportunities to reduce travel distances, increase mobility options, improve access to workplaces, and conserve the region's resource areas. Neighborhood mobility area (NMAs) are identified throughout the SCAG region for providing safe and convenient connections to schools, shopping, services, places of worship, parks, greenways and other destinations. NMAs are defined by having a high number of intersections, low observed travel speed, high mix of uses and high accessibility to "everyday" destinations. These are areas where complete streets and sustainability policies support and encourage replacing or reducing single and multi -occupant automobile use with walking, bicycling, skateboarding and slow speed electric vehicles (such as e-bikes, scooters, senior mobility devices and neighborhood electric vehicles). SCAG projects that from 2016 to 2045, nearly 29 percent of new households will be located in NMAs. Based on a GIS analysis of public SCAG data produced for the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, the City of La Quinta includes two distinct PGAs with a combined area of approximately 1,540 acres. This PGA coverage is approximately 6.73 percent of the City's total area of 22,855.5 acres. One designated location is approximately 1,239 acres associated with Highway 111. The second PGA location in the City is a single NMA covering approximately 301 acres, generally encompassing The Village, which is considered in the General Plan as the traditional commercial core of the City. The project site is located approximately 5 miles southeast of the City's NMA and approximately 6.3 miles south of the Highway 111 area. As a result, the project's location is not expected to be afforded the traditional benefits attributed to designated PGA locations or high -quality transit areas. However, residential and mixed -uses on the Project site are assumed in the adopted La Quinta General Plan and were approved by the City in 1995, with the adoption of the Travertine and Green Specific Plan. Additionally, as explained in the subsequent analysis, the Project's land uses and associated improvements are expected to introduce benefits and characteristics similar to those in PGA locations by collocating commercial, residential and recreational facilities and creating multi -modal connections, including biking and hiking trails, between these uses. Additionally, the Project represents a reduction in residential units proposed to be located outside of PGAs relative to the Travertine and Green Specific Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-22 October 2023 428 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS The Project's consistency analysis is modeled after CARB's evaluation of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals, key supporting actions and policy factors to achieve the targets. The goals of 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal) fall into four core categories: economy, mobility, environment and healthy/complete communities. The plan explicitly lays out goals related to housing, transportation technologies, equity and resilience in order to adequately reflect the increasing importance of these topics in the region, and where possible the goals have been developed to link to potential performance measures and targets. Project Consistency with the Goals of SCAG's 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Goal 1. Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness. Consistent. This goal is primarily directed toward SCAG, as it relates to encouraging regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness, and therefore has limited applicability to individual development projects. Nevertheless, the proposed project would encourage economic growth at the regional and local level by introducing a mixture of housing, resort, and recreational opportunities in an integrated plan serving the Eastern Coachella Valley. In doing so, the project will contribute to the Coachella Valley region's ability to offer housing, hospitality, and recreational destinations. Goal 2: Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety for people and goods. Consistent. The Travertine Specific Plan proposes various street improvements that are balanced with non -motorized options for sidewalks, multipurpose trails, bicycle lanes and golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) lanes to promote mobility and travel safety of people within the community. The aspect of goods mobility has limited applicability to individual developments, but the project would not conflict with or burden the regional goods mobility across the SCAG region. Goal 3: Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system. Consistent. This goal is primarily directed toward SCAG and has limited applicability to individual development projects. The project would not conflict with the security and resilience of the regional transportation system. Goal 4: Increase person and goods movement and travel choices within the transportation system. Consistent. The aspect of person and goods movement has limited applicability to individual development projects. Pertaining to travel choices within the transportation system, the project will introduce non -motorized transportation improvements that will improve travel and circulation choices within the community. The Project includes a network of pedestrian and bike trails to provide a direct link to the community open space and gathering areas, as well as passive and active spaces. The system also provides private internal interconnecting trails and strolling trails, and on -street (Class II) bike trails. The project would not conflict with the SunLine Transit Agency's periodic adjustments to service coverage or implementation of SunLine transit network, as these are a function of demand. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-23 October 2023 429 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Goal 5: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Consistent. The project incorporates project design features and mitigation measures to reduce GHG, and criteria air pollutant emissions. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the City's GHG Reduction Plan, and with implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-11, the Project will reduce GHG emissions consistent with the SCAQMD's service population efficiency metric and the state's long-term GHG emissions reductions targets. However, even with the above measures, the EIR conservatively concludes that Project GHG emissions will be potentially significant because the use of carbon credits has not been broadly adopted in the Coachella Valley to mitigate GHG emissions impacts of residential and resort communities. The Project will also result in potentially significant and unavoidable emissions of VOCs. Please refer to Section 4.3 (Air Quality) for further discussion of the Project's impacts on air quality. Notably, in adopting the 2020-2045 RTP, SCAG found that, like the Project, SCAG's regional plan would result in potentially significant and unavoidable GHG and Air Quality impacts and recommended mitigation measures to be implemented to avoid and reduce such impacts. The Project proposes to mitigate GHG and Air Quality impacts in reliance on measures similar to those recommended in the 2020-2045 RTP EIR. Goal 6: Support healthy and equitable communities. Consistent. The designated pedestrian paths and trails incorporated into the project's site design would facilitate equitable access to active transportation for residents of the proposed dwelling units of varying housing densities and product types, thus promoting a healthy community in the Eastern Coachella Valley. Goal 7: Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network. Consistent. The proposed Project will establish a buffer of open space areas adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide, such that habitable structures will not be situated adjacent to the neighboring mountain slopes. The separations and setbacks will serve as fuel breaks to control or diminish the risk of the spread of fire crossing, reducing the potential exposure of homes and property to the threat of wildfire risks. The proposed street improvements will contribute to the build -out of the City's General Plan Circulation Element. Goal 8: Leverage new transportation technologies and data -driven solutions that result in more efficient travel. Not Applicable. This policy is directed toward SCAG and does not apply to individual development projects. The adoption of transportation technologies, primarily pertaining to electric vehicles or emissions reductions, will be a function of state and federal requirements to which residents will be required to adapt as applicable. However, the project will include routes for golf carts and NEVs (also Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-24 October 2023 430 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS referred to as Low -Speed Electric Vehicles or LSEVs), as well as recharging facilities at the resort/spa, golf clubhouse and community clubhouse. Goal 9: Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas that are supported by multiple transportation options. Consistent. The project encourages the development of diverse housing types, and if approved by the City, would help the City attain its RHNA allocation of moderate -income and above moderate -income households. However, while the project is located on a site long -planned for residential development under the City's General Plan, the site is not currently supported by multiple transportation options. The Project does not preclude new residential construction in areas of the City that are served by transit. The Project represents a reduction of the intensity of uses in the approved Travertine and Green Specific Plan and also incorporates design features that reduce vehicle miles traveled. Specifically, the project includes up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types integrated with non -motorized transportation facilities consisting of sidewalks, multipurpose trails, bicycle lanes and golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) lanes in addition to the street improvements for motorized travel. The Specific Plan provides an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of paths to allow safe and convenient access to recreational and community centers. Sidewalks and two Class II bike lanes will be provided along Jefferson Street and Loop throughout the project site. The proposed internal Class II bike lanes will be developed along Jefferson Street, connecting to Avenue 62. These lanes will be 8-feet wide to accommodate both bikes and golf carts. Implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan would be consistent with the City's General Plan 2035 goals and policies for non -motorized transportation. Goal 10: Promote conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration of habitats. Consistent. The Project proponent also worked closely with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to ensure that the proposed land uses were compatible with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), prepared pursuant to Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. CVMSHCP is also a Natural Communities Conservation Plan permitted under Fish and Game Code 2800 et seq. The USFWS and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) issued permits for the CVMSHCP in 2008. The Specific Plan authorized disturbance must stay outside the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. The remainder of the property within the Specific Plan area and inside the Conservation Area will be preserved and undistributed in perpetuity. The Project proponent committed to providing a no interest loan to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) to acquire bighorn sheep habitat in the Project property if needed and the Project proponent was to provide additional fees for bighorn sheep monitoring and research. The project includes recreational open space consisting of a 5-mile public trail system, staging areas, gathering areas, and passive and active spaces on approximately 55.9 acres. Natural open space land uses are proposed to occur on approximately 301.2 acres on the southern portion of the project site for conservation and preservation purposes. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-25 October 2023 431 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS SB 3212017 Scoping Plan Consistency The 2017 Scoping Plan reflects the 2030 target of a 40% reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Table 4.8-6 summarizes the project's consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan. As summarized, the project will not conflict with any of the provisions of the 2017Scoping Plan and in fact supports seven of the action categories. Table 4.8-6 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary Action Responsible Parties Consistency Implement SB 350 by 2030 Not Applicable But Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. The Project would use energy from Imperial Irrigation District (IID). IID has Increase the Renewables Portfolio committed to diversify its portfolio of energy Standard to 50% of retail sales by 2030 and sources by increasing energy from wind and solar ensure grid reliability. sources. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct IID energy source diversification efforts. Further, IID states that they have met and exceeded all RPS requirements to date. Not Applicable But Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. The Project would be designed and constructed to implement energy Establish annual targets for statewide efficiency measures and would include several energy efficiency savings and demand measures designed to reduce energy consumption. reduction that will achieve a cumulative CPUC, The Project would not interfere with or obstruct doubling of statewide energy efficiency CEC, policies or strategies to establish annual targets for savings in electricity and natural gas end CARB, IID statewide energy efficiency savings and demand uses by 2030. reduction, including IID's Renewable Portfolio Standard. Examples of these elements are found in Sections 1.6, 3.4, 6.0 and 3.0 of the SPA. Refer to the Energy section for additional detail. Reduce GHG emissions in the electricity sector through the implementation of the above measures and other actions as modeled in Integrated Resource Planning Not Applicable But Consistent. This policy applies (IRP) to meet GHG emissions reductions to the State of California's regulation of the planning targets in the IRP process. Load- electricity sector. Please see discussion related to serving entities and publicly- owned the Renewable Portfolio Standard above. utilities meet GHG emissions reductions planning targets through a combination of measures as described in IRPs. Implement Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels) Not Applicable But Consistent. This is a CARB CARB, Mobile Source Strategy. The Project would not • At least 1.5 million zero emission and California State obstruct or interfere with CARB zero emission and plug-in hybrid light -duty EV by 2025. Transportation plug-in hybrid light -duty EV 2025 targets. The Agency (CaISTA), Travertine Specific Plan includes routes for golf Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-26 October 2023 432 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Action Responsible Parties Consistency Strategic Growth carts and NEVs (also referred to as Low -Speed Council (SGC), Electric Vehicles or LSEVs), as well as charging California facilities at the resort/spa, golf clubhouse and Department of community clubhouse. The Specific Plan provides Transportation an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of (Caltrans), paths to allow safe and convenient access to CEC, OPR, recreational and community centers. Not Applicable But Consistent. This policy applies Local Agencies to the State of California. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with CARB zero emission and plug-in hybrid light -duty EV 2030 targets. The Travertine Specific Plan includes routes for golf carts and NEVs • At least 4.2 million zero emission and (also referred to as Low -Speed Electric Vehicles or plug-in hybrid light -duty EV by 2030. LSEVs), as well as recharging facilities at the resort/spa, golf clubhouse and community clubhouse. The Specific Plan provides an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of paths to allow safe and convenient access to recreational and community centers. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. This is a CARB Mobile • Further increase GHG stringency on all Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or light -duty vehicles beyond existing interfere with CARB efforts to further increase GHG Advanced Clean cars regulations. stringency on all light -duty vehicles beyond existing Advanced Clean cars regulations. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. This is a CARB Mobile • Medium- and Heavy -Duty GHG Phase Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or 2• interfere with CARB efforts to implement Medium - and Heavy -Duty GHG Phase 2. • Innovative Clean Transit: Transition to a suite of to -be -determined innovative clean transit options. Assumed 20% of new urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies will be zero emission buses with the to the transportation sector. This is a CARB Mobile penetration of zero -emission technology Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or ramped up to 100% of new sales in 2030. interfere with CARB efforts improve transit -source Also, new natural gas buses, starting in emissions. 2018, and diesel buses, starting in 2020, meet the optional heavy-duty low-NOx standard. • Last Mile Delivery: New regulation that would result in the use of low NOx or Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies cleaner engines and the deployment of to the State of California. This is a CARB Mobile increasing numbers of zero -emission trucks Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or primarily for class 3-7 last mile delivery interfere with CARB efforts to improve last mile trucks in California. This measure assumes delivery emissions. ZEVs comprise 2.5% of new Class 3-7 truck Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-27 October 2023 433 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Action Responsible Parties Consistency sales in local fleets starting in 2020, increasing to 10% in 2025 and remaining flat through 2030. • Further reduce vehicle miles traveled Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies (VMT) through continued implementation to the State of California. This Project involves a of SB 375 and regional Sustainable reduction in the number of dwelling units and Communities Strategies; forthcoming commercial square footage previously approved by statewide implementation of SB 743; and the City in an area that is not currently served by potential additional VMT reduction transit. The Project has also been designed to strategies not specified in the Mobile facilitate multi -modal transportation. For the Source Strategy but included in the above reasons, the Project would not obstruct or document "Potential VMT Reduction interfere with implementation of SB 375 and would Strategies for Discussion." therefore not conflict with this measure. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies Increase stringency of SB 375 Sustainable CARB to the State of California. The Project does not Communities Strategy (2035 targets). preclude the state from adopting more stringent regional GHG emissions reduction targets. Ca ISTA, SGC, OPR, CARB, Governor's Office of Business and • Harmonize project performance with Economic Development (GO- Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies emissions reductions and increase Biz)' to the State of California. The Project would not competitiveness of transit and active California obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to transportation modes (e.g., via guideline Infrastructure and harmonize transportation facility project documents, funding programs, project Economic performance with emissions reductions and selection, etc.). Development Bank increase competitiveness of transit and active (IBank), transportation modes. Department of Finance (DOF), California Transportation Commission (CTC), Caltrans Ca I STA, By 2019, develop pricing policies to support Caltrans, Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies low-GHG transportation (e.g. low -emission CTC, to the State of California.The Project would not vehicle zones for heavy duty, road user, OPR, obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to develop parking pricing, transit discounts). SGC, pricing policies to support low-GHG transportation. CARB Implement California Sustainable Freight Action Plan Ca ISTA, CaIEPA, Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies • Improve freight system efficiency. CNRA, to freight, which is not a component of the Project. CARB, Travertine Draft EIR October 2023 434 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Action Responsible Parties Consistency Caltrans, • Deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles CEC, and equipment capable of zero emission GO -Biz operation and maximize both zero and Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies near -zero emission freight vehicles and to freight, which is not a component of the Project equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. When adopted, this Adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a measure would apply to all fuel purchased and Carbon Intensity reduction of 18%. CARB used by the Project in the state. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a Carbon Intensity reduction of 18%. Implement the Short -Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS) by 2030 Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies • 40% reduction in methane and to the State of California. The Project shall comply hydrofluorocarbon emissions below 2013 CARB, with this measure and reduce any Project -source levels. CalRecycle, SLPS emissions accordingly. The Project would not CDFA, obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to reduce SWRCB, SLPS emissions. This requirement is a statewide • 50% reduction in black carbon Local Air Districts mandate to be implemented at a regional level and emissions below 2013 levels. is not under the purview of specific individual development projects. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies CARB, to the State of California. The Project would California Recycling implement waste reduction and recycling Market Development measures consistent with State and City By 2019, develop regulations and programs Act (CalRecycle), requirements. The Project would not obstruct or to support organic waste landfill reduction CDFA, interfere with agency efforts to support organic goals in the SLCP and SB 1383. California State Water waste landfill reduction goals in the SLCP and SB Resource Control 1383. This requirement is a statewide mandate to Board (SWRCB), be implemented at a regional level and is not under Local Air Districts the purview of specific individual development projects. Implement the post-2020 Cap -and -Trade Not Applicable but Consistent. The Project is not Program with declining annual caps. CARB subject to the Cap -and -Trade Program. By 2018, develop Integrated Natural and Working Lands Implementation Plan to secure California's land base as a net carbon sink Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to natural and working lands and applies to the CNRA, State of California. The Project is not expected to • Protect land from conversion through Departments Within CDFA, result in any potentially significant impacts as a conservation easements and other CaIEPA, result of conversion of prior vineyard uses on the incentives. CARB Project site. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to protect land from conversion through conservation easements and other incentives. The proposed development will Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-29 October 2023 435 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Action Responsible Parties Consistency result in 6.5 acres of disturbance inside the MSHCP Conservation Area, however, the project is Covered Activity under the CVMSHCP. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. The Project site is vacant disturbed property and does not comprise an area • Increase the long-term resilience of that would effectively provide for carbon carbon storage in the land base and sequestration. The Project would not obstruct or enhance sequestration capacity interfere with agency efforts to increase the long- term resilience of carbon storage in the land base and enhance sequestration capacity. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies to the State of California. Where appropriate, Project designs will incorporate wood or wood • Utilize wood and agricultural products products. The Project would not obstruct or to increase the amount of carbon stored in interfere with agency efforts to encourage use of the natural and built environments wood and agricultural products to increase the amount of carbon stored in the natural and built environments. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies • Establish scenario projections to serve to the State of California. The Project would not as the foundation for the Implementation obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to Plan establish scenario projections to serve as the foundation for the Implementation Plan. Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies Establish a carbon accounting framework to the State of California. The Project would not for natural and working lands as described CARB obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to in SB 859 by 2018 establish a carbon accounting framework for natural and working lands as described in SB 859 by 2018. CNRA • California Department of Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies Forestry and Fire to the State of California. The Project would not Implement Forest Carbon Plan Protection obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to implement the Forest Carbon Plan. • (CALFIRE), CaIEPA and Departments Within Not Applicable but Consistent. This policy applies Identify and expand funding and financing to the State of California. The Project would not mechanisms to support GHG reductions State Agencies & obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to identify across all sectors. Local Agencies and expand funding and financing mechanisms to support GHG reductions across all sectors. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-30 October 2023 436 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS As shown above, the project would not conflict with any of the 2017 Scoping Plan elements as any regulations adopted would apply directly or indirectly to the Project. Refer to Sections 1.6, 3.4, 6.0 and 3.0 of the SPA. 2022 Scoping Plan Consistency The 2022 Scoping Plan recommends project consistency with a locally adopted plan for the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions as the preferred method for CEQA lead agencies to demonstrate that land use projects are consistent with state long-term GHG emission reduction targets. The 2022 Scoping Plan also endorses the use of GHG thresholds adopted by local air districts. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the City's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan. Further, and in order to demonstrate compliance with the SCAQMD GHG efficiency metric and state long-term targets for the reduction of GHG emissions, the Project will implement MM GHG-1 through GHG-11 to further reduce Project GHG emissions. In conclusion, the Project is consistent with the City's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan. For this reason, Project impacts on applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases are less than significant. 4.8.5 Cumulative Impacts GHG emissions are understood to be inherently cumulative in nature with global implications with different lengths of time that they remain in the atmosphere and active GHGs. However, the statewide climate change programs and GHG reduction strategies forming part of AB 32 and subsequent climate change legislation, established a measurable regulatory standard for quantifying and understanding potential GHG impacts resulting from land development activities, like the proposed project. Through a series of press releases, CARB has provided updates on the attainment progress toward the statewide GHG emission targets. On July 28, 2021, CARB announced via Press Release No. 21-34 that state Greenhouse Gas Inventory shows emissions have continued to drop below 2020 target, which is a return to the 1990 GHG levels. The target was achieved four years ahead of schedule in 2016. Data for 2019 demonstrated that annual emissions fell from 425 million metric tons in 2018 to 418 million metric tons in 2019, below the 431 million metric ton target. Moreover, annual per capita GHG emissions in California have dropped from a 2001 peak of 14.0 metric tons per person to 10.5 metric tons per person in 2019, a 25 percent decrease and about half the national average for per capita emissions. The combined project emissions are estimated to be 4.39 MTCO2e/SP per year in 2045, which is considerably lower than the statewide or national average for per capita emissions, but in excess of the screening threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP per year applicable to this project analysis. While the Project is consistent with applicable plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, the project would result in a cumulatively considerable increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-31 October 2023 437 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 4.8.6 Mitigation Measures GHG-1: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall purchase a minimum of approximately 408,720 MTCO2e credits (approximately 13,624 MTCO2e per year for 30 years). The purchase of carbon credits must be made from a CARB-approved carbon registry with independent third -party verification. Examples of approved registries include the American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Verra. The applicant shall submit documentation of the offset purchase to the City demonstrating that it mitigates a minimum of approximately 13,624 MTCO2e per year (408,720 MTCO2e over a 30-year period), prior to any occupancy of the site. Alternatively, the project applicant may submit a GHG reduction plan to the City for approval that achieves an equal level of GHG reduction outlined herein. The GHG plan must include enforceable actions that reduce GHG emissions to at or below the total mitigated values presented herein. GHG-2: All residences shall incorporate roof -top solar panels, in -home batteries and EV charger stations to facilitate use of EVs, golf carts and other low -speed electric vehicles (LSEVs). GHG-3: All planned single-family homes shall be electric -ready and shall include electrical circuits for space heating, water heating, cooking/ovens, and clothes dryers, electrical panel, branch circuits, and transfer switch for battery storage. GHG-4: Dedicated circuits and panels in residential and commercial buildings shall be provided to easily convert from natural gas to electric in the future. GHG-5: All non-residential components of the development where vehicle parking is provided shall provide EV chargers. GHG-6: All household and other appliances shall be of the highest energy efficiency rating, such as Energy Star, practicable at the time of purchase. GHG-7: To limit and reduce energy use associated with water consumption, all project landscaping shall be desert and other drought tolerant vegetation, consistent with the local development standards. GHG-9: All HVAC systems shall be Very High Efficiency HVAC (SEER 16/80% AFUE or 9 HSPF) or greater efficiency. GHG-10: All domestic hot water systems shall be Very High Efficiency Water Heater (0.92 Energy Factor) with Enhanced Solar Pre -heat System (min. 0.35 Net Solar Fraction). GHG-11: All potable water fixtures shall have EPA WaterSense Certification or greater efficiency. Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-32 October 2023 438 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 4.8.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 through GHG-12, Project -related GHG emissions are reduced to 0.71 MTCO2e per SP per year which is less than the applicable threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e per SP per year interpolated for 2045. Nevertheless, as explained above, because the use of carbon credits has not been broadly adopted in the Coachella Valley to mitigate GHG emissions impacts of residential and resort communities, this analysis conservatively considers the project to have a significant and unavoidable impact concerning GHG emissions. 4.8.8 References 1. Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board, February 2010 2. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2019, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, 2021 Edition, California Air Resources Board, July 28, 2021 3. Press Release No. 18-37 & 19-35, California Air Resources Board Press Release, July 2018 and August 2019 4. Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. 5. Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. 6. Federal Clean Air Act (CWA) 7. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2017 8. Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book 9. West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency Bulletin, Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, accessed February 4, 2023 Travertine Draft EIR 4.8-33 October 2023 439 Page intentionally blank 440 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.9.1 Introduction This section establishes the Project environmental setting for purposes of Hazards and Hazardous Materials, identifies both the applicable thresholds of significance and the Project's potentially significant hazards impacts, and identifies mitigation measures capable of reducing any potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. This section also analyzes impacts associated with the Project that may potentially affect public health and safety or degrade the environment. This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment regarding proposed land uses, as well as public resources provided by the Department of Toxic Substances, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Additional federal, state, and local programs and regulations related to hazards and the use of hazardous materials are referenced in this section. A review of the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), prepared by Geo Forward, Inc. in January 2023, as well as the Travertine Specific Plan, Avenue 60/Madison Street, La Quinta, CA, Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, prepared by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) in May 2021, were also included in this analysis (Appendix 1.1 and Appendix 1.2. respectively). 4.9.2 Existing Conditions In the City of La Quinta, hazardous materials generation is limited to small quantity generators (those generating less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month), ranging from individual households to service stations and medical clinics. Household hazardous waste can be disposed of properly through Household Hazardous Waste disposal events, or at a network of "ABOP" facilities operated by the Riverside County Waste Management Department. An ABOP — or Antifreeze, Batteries, Oil, Paint — facility is located in Palm Springs, at 1100 Vella Road, and accepts these materials, as well as electronic waste. Household Hazardous Waste disposal events are held periodically at varying locations throughout the County, including cities in the Coachella Valley. Development activities have the potential to encounter previously unknown hazardous materials contamination from historical use of a property. However, such contamination can be mediated by existing federal, State, and local policies and procedures implemented by the designated local enforcement agency. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal methods to reduce their potential to damage public health and the environment. Manufacturer's specifications dictate the proper use, handling, and disposal methods for the specific substances. All hazardous waste poses a threat to humans and the environment, and therefore is regulated by federal, State, and local programs. In most cases, it is Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-1 September 2023 441 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a violation of federal or State law to improperly store, apply, transport, or dispose of hazardous materials and waste. Project Site The project site is located on approximately 855 acres in the southern portion of the City of La Quinta. The site is located north of the Martinez Rockslide, east of the Santa Rosa Mountains, south of Coral Mountain, and west of vacant land and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) percolation ponds. Existing residential communities near the project property includes the Quarry at La Quinta, north of the project, Trilogy La Quinta, east of the project, and Andalusia Country Club, northeast of the project. The site is currently vacant. A portion of the property previously operated as agricultural land, which has been abandoned since 2007. At the time of the vineyard's operation, on -site facilities included water storage and chemical mixing facilities. These facilities were removed by 2011 (based on historical aerial imagery) and there is no evidence of soil staining or other indications of any hazardous materials spills, including fertilizer or pesticides. In addition to the abandoned vineyard, the site consists of a rock berm at the northeast border (east of Coral Mountain), mounds of landscaping rocks and boulders immediately north of the abandoned vineyard, dirt roads surrounding the abandoned vineyard, electrical poles lining the south easterly range of the abandoned vineyard, three concrete platforms in close proximity of groundwater wells, and monitoring wells in southern half of the project site; however, the project site is predominantly undeveloped and vacant. The Project proposes the development of 1,200 residential dwelling units on approximately 378.8 acres; tourist commercial uses consisting of a resort and spa facility with up to 100 villas and a resort golf facility on approximately 84.5 acres; open space recreational uses on approximately 55.9 acres; open space natural uses on approximately 301.2 acres; and master planned roadway system on approximately 35 acres. In addition to these onsite developments, the Project also proposes an offsite electric power substation within 2-miles of the Project's northern and northeastern boundaries. The substation would provide electricity to the Project, and will be developed in compliance with the Imperial Irrigation District's (IID) regulations. The location of the proposed substation has not been determined but will occur within the off -site utility field shown on Exhibit 3.3, Site Location Map, (in Chapter 3.0, Project Description) where up to five CVWD wells will also be developed. Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-2 October 2023 442 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Local Schools The Project is located within the boundary of the Coachella Valley Unified School District. The closest school is Westside Elementary School, located approximately 2.7 miles northeast of the Project at 82225 Airport Boulevard in Thermal. Public Airports/Private Airstrips The Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport is located at 56-850 Higgins Drive in Thermal, California approximately 5 miles northeast of the future Avenue 62 entrance to the Project site, and approximately 6 miles northeast of the future Jefferson Street entrance to the Project. The Project is outside the Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone. Urban/Wildland Interface A wildland - urban area interface fire is a wildfire in a geographical area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with wildland or vegetative fuels. The Project site is located adjacent to undeveloped natural mountain reserves and private land. The closest developed residential dwellings lie approximately 0.25 miles east of the proposed Project and is separated by a levee. The natural open space area west, south, and southeast of the Project is associated with the Santa Rosa Mountains and is designated as a Conservation Area of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). The southern portion of the Project site, identified as Planning Area 20, falls within the Conservation Area as well. Disturbance within the Conservation Area would be minimal and include compatible uses such as hiking trails as well as the construction of two water reservoirs and associated infrastructure to provide water to the project. Fuel modification would be minimal in these areas as well, therefore, any fuel modification for fire control would be done within planning areas that lay adjacent to the conservation area. Further discussion is provided in Section 4.19, Wildfire, of this Draft EIR. 4.9.3 Regulatory Setting The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR Title 40, Part 261) defines hazardous materials based on ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, and/or toxicity properties. The State of California defines hazardous materials as substances that are toxic, ignitable, or flammable, reactive and/or corrosive, which have the capacity of causing harm or a health hazard during normal exposure or an accidental release. As a result, the use and management of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances is regulated under existing federal, state, and local laws, which are summarized below. The regulatory setting establishes a framework for addressing all aspects of hazards and hazardous materials that would be affected by construction and operations of the proposed Project. Federal Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-3 October 2023 443 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS United States Environmental Protection Agency The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a federal agency with the mission to protect human health and the environment. According to the EPA, hazardous wastes are characterized as wastes that exhibit any one or more of the following characteristic properties: ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity. The EPA also contains a list of hazardous materials and procedures when dealing with hazardous waste and materials. The EPA has classified hazardous waste into four categories: • Listed wastes — wastes from common manufacturing and industrial processes, waste from specific industries such as petroleum refining or pesticide manufacturing, and discarded commercial products; • Characteristic wastes — non -listed wastes that exhibit ignitability, corrosively, reactivity, and toxicity; • Universal wastes — batteries, mercury -containing equipment, and fluorescent lamps and bulbs; and • Mixed wastes — radioactive and hazardous waste components. Various rules regulate the use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials. A hazardous material may become hazardous waste upon its accidental release into the environment. All hazardous wastes must be discharged into a Class I landfill. No Class I landfill is currently operated within Riverside County. Hazardous Waste generated within Riverside County and disposed of off - site, is transported to Kern County or Santa Barbra County, where active Class I landfills are located. Some waste is also transported out of the State. EPA's main responsibility is to promote pre -planning efforts to deal with hazardous waste disasters and encourage various stakeholders to prepare for natural and man-made disasters. EPA is also required to review emergency response plans for federal agencies, and participate in exercises with federal, State, local and tribal emergency responders. USEPA also serves federal landowners and resource management agencies, including the BLM, BOR and US Fish & Wildlife Service, to ensure that projects that could adversely impact federal resources or facilities are properly addressed and mitigated. EPA is also required to review emergency response plans for federal agencies, and participate in exercises with federal, State, local and tribal emergency responders. EPA Enforcement and Compliance History Online EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) is a national database that focuses on inspection, violation, and enforcement data for the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and also includes Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-4 October 2023 444 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS and Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data. ECHO can be used to search for facilities, investigate pollution sources, search for EPA enforcement cases, examine and create enforcement -related maps, and analyze trends in compliance and enforcement data. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act The EPA has the authority and responsibility to regulate hazardous waste by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). Through RCRA, EPA is responsible for monitoring the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. Over the years EPA has increased regulation of underground storage tanks for petroleum and other hazardous substances, focused on waste minimization programs, such as phasing out hazardous wastes from landfills, and on mandating corrective measures regarding the unauthorized release of hazardous waste. Clean Water Act The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) was established in 1972 addresses the regulation of the discharge of pollutants into the waters of the United States and surface water quality. Under the CWA, the EPA has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industries. The EPA has also developed national water quality criteria recommendations for pollutants in surface waters. It is unlawful under the CWA to discharge any pollutant from a point source, which is a discrete conveyance such as pipes or man-made ditches, into navigable waters unless a permit was obtained. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Industrial, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters. This includes dredge and fill activities in jurisdictional waters of the US. Compliance monitoring under the NPDES Program encompasses a range of techniques in order to address the most significant problems and to promote compliance among the regulated community. Also see Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. State California Environmental Protection Agency The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) has broad jurisdiction over hazardous materials management in the State of California. CalEPA's mission to restore, protect and enhance the environment, to ensure public health, environmental quality and economic vitality is achieved by developing, implementing and enforcing environmental laws. These laws regulate air, water, and soil quality, pesticide use, and waste recycling and reduction. CaIEPA oversees and coordinates with the Air Resources Board (ARB), Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-5 October 2023 445 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to improve California's environment. Department of Toxic Substance Control DTSC is responsible for protecting public health and the environment from hazardous waste generated in California. It regulates under the authority of the federal RCRA of 1976 and the California Health and Safety Code. DTSC operates a variety of programs including overseeing cleanups, enforcing state regulations, and public education. Within CalEPA, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has primary regulatory responsibility for hazardous waste management and cleanup to protect California and Californians from exposures to hazardous wastes. DTSC is required to compile and update each year, or as appropriate, a list of hazardous waste sites pursuant to the Cortese Lists under Government Code Section 65962.5(a). DTSC has created the EnviroStor database of properties throughout California that may be contaminated. EnviroStor EnviroStor is a database maintained by the State of California DTSC. The EnviroStor database identifies sites with known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. It includes the identification of formerly contaminated properties that have been released for reuse; properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses; and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List) The Cortese List statute requires DTSC, State Department of Health Services, and State Water Resources Control Board, to compile and update as appropriate, but at least annually, and submit to the Secretary of CaIEPA. The State agencies (i.e., DTSC, State Department of Health Services, and State Water Resource Control Board) are required to submit information about hazardous materials release sites. Specifically, the DTSC shall submit a list of all hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action, all land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property, all information received by the DTSC on hazardous waste disposals on public land sites listed pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code, and sites included in the Abandoned Site Assessment Program. The State Department of Health Services shall submit a list of all public drinking water wells that contain detectable levels of organic contaminants and that are subject to water analysis pursuant to Section 116395 of the Health and Safety Code. Finally, the State Water Resources Control Board shall submit a list of all underground storage tanks for which an unauthorized release report is filed, all Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-6 October 2023 446 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS solid waste disposal facilities from which there is a migration of hazardous waste and for which a California regional water quality control board has notified the DTSC pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 13273 of the Water Code, and all cease and desist orders issued after January 1, 1986, pursuant to Section 13301 of the Water Code, and all cleanup or abatement orders issued after January 1, 1986, pursuant to Section 13304 of the Water Code, that concern the discharge of wastes that are hazardous materials. State Water Resources Control Board SWRCB is responsible for, among other activities, regulating wastewater discharges to surface waters and groundwater. This includes discharges from all construction, industrial, municipal, and agricultural activities. The SWRCB delegates these responsibilities to various regional water quality control boards throughout California. In the Coachella Valley this is the Region 7 Colorado River Basin office of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB acts under Cal EPA and is responsible for implementing regulations pertaining to management of soil and groundwater investigation and cleanup. RWQCB regulations are contained in Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Additional State regulations applicable to hazardous materials are contained in Title 22 of the CCR. Title 26 of the CCR is a compilation of those hazardous material, waste, and toxic - related regulations contained in CCR Titles 3, 8, 13, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24, and 27 that are applicable to hazardous materials. Region 7 is responsible for overseeing corrective actions associated with leaks and improper disposal from underground storage tanks, such as gas station tanks, and provides assistance to County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health on underground storage leaks. The Regional Board is also responsible for enforcement of Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act and for the monitoring of activities that may or do impact designated waters of both the state and federal governments. Also see Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. GeoTracker GeoTracker is a database maintained by the State of California Water Resources Control Board that provides online access to environmental data. It serves as the management system for tracking regulatory data on sites that can potentially impact groundwater, particularly those requiring groundwater cleanup and permitted facilities, such as operating underground storage tanks and land disposal sites. Hazardous Material Management Plans In January 1996, CaIEPA adopted regulations implementing a Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program (Unified Program). The six program elements of the Unified Program are hazardous waste generators and hazardous waste on -site treatment, Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-7 October 2023 447 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS underground storage tanks, above -ground storage tanks, hazardous material release response plans and inventories. The program is implemented at the local level by a local agency, the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The CUPA is responsible for consolidating the administration of the six program elements within its jurisdiction. California Hazardous Material Release Response Plan and Inventory Law Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code (HSC) requires that in order to protect the public health and safety and the environment, it is necessary to establish business and area plans relating to the handling and release or threatened release of hazardous materials (Article 1), as well as implement regulations regarding hazardous material management (Article 2), emergency planning and Community Right -to -Know Act of 1986 (Article 3) and the California Toxic Release Inventory Program Act of 2007 (Article 4). California Emergency Response Plan California has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, State, and local governments and private agencies. Response to hazardous materials incidents is one part of this plan. The plan is managed by the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services, which coordinates the responses of other agencies, including CaIEPA, California Highway Patrol (CHP), RWQCB, and the Riverside County Emergency Management Department. California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), better known as Cal/OSHA, protects workers from health and safety hazards on the job in almost every workplace in California through its research, standards, enforcement, and consultation programs. Cal/OSHA enforces complaint and accident investigations, targeted and programmed inspections, citations, special orders and orders to take special action, orders prohibiting use, as well as permits, certifications, licenses, approvals, and classification. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) protects over 31 million acres of California's privately -owned wildlands and provides varied emergency services in 36 of the State's 58 counties via contracts with local governments. The Department's Fire Protection Program consists of multiple activities including wildland pre -fire engineering, vegetation management, fire planning, education, and law enforcement. Typical fire prevention projects include brush clearance, prescribed fire, defensible space inspections, emergency evacuation planning, fire prevention education, fire hazard severity mapping, and fire -related law enforcement activities. CAL FIRE provides Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps for State Responsibility Area lands and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-8 October 2023 448 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS for Local Responsibility Area lands for each county in California. These maps allow state and local agencies to identify areas susceptible to wildfire hazards. Also see Section 4.19, Wildfires. Regional and Local Riverside County Department of Environmental Health The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) provides programs and services related to protecting public health, safety and the environment. Within the DEH are two divisions, District Environmental Service, and Environmental Protection and Oversight. The Environmental Protection and Oversight Division (EPO) is responsible for handling and regulating hazardous materials, land use, water systems, underground storage tanks, solid waste and business emergency plans and is responsible for managing a list of all hazardous waste generators in the County. In the City of La Quinta such generators of hazardous waste include golf courses, gas stations, dry cleaners, grocery stores, car dealerships and the City's maintenance facility yard. There are no hazardous waste generators currently located on the project site. Emergency Response Services Emergency response in La Quinta involves numerous State, regional, local, and non-profit agencies whose goal is to prepare local residents for emergencies caused by natural or human incidents. The State of California passed the California Emergency Services Act in 1970 to provide the basic legal authorities for emergency management in the State. The Act created the Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES), which serves as the lead agency for emergency management and to organize all levels of government, businesses, community organizations and volunteers to deal with local emergencies. The County of Riverside operates the Office of Emergency Services through Riverside County Fire Department. Riverside OES is responsible for mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery activities from hazards and threats occurring in Riverside County. Riverside County Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team (DEH HMERT) responds 24 hours/7 days a week throughout Riverside County to a variety of chemical related incidents and complaints. The Team works closely with multiple local, state, and federal agencies and is a member of the Countywide Hazmat Operations Group. DEH HMERT responds jointly with the Riverside County Fire Department or CAL FIRE Hazardous Materials Team, or any CAL FIRE contracted city. Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan In order to coordinate efforts relating to hazardous materials management, the County has developed a Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP), which addressed proper disposal, processing, Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-9 October 2023 449 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS handling, storage and treatment of hazardous materials. The City of La Quinta has also adopted the County's HWMP and implements it at the local level. Hazardous Materials Business Plan All facilities in Riverside County that handle or store hazardous materials in quantities determined by State law and regulation are to report such activities to the County of Riverside CUPA and DEH before the initiation of operation of their business. In Riverside County, the CUPA is the Fire Department. The amount of detail required to be reported depends on whether or not a facility is subject to the State Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP). A HMBP is a document containing detailed information on the storage of hazardous materials at a facility. Chapter 6.95 of the California Health & Safety Code (HSC) and Title 19, Division 2, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) require that facilities which use or store such materials at or above reporting thresholds to implement a HMBP. Riverside County Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan The Riverside County Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) identifies the County's hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences and set goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and man-made hazards. The Riverside County LHMP was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 to achieve eligibility and potentially secure mitigation funding through Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Mitigation Assistants, Pre -Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs. The City of La Quinta is a participant to the County LHMP. City of La Quinta Emergency Programs The City Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) addresses the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City of La Quinta. The EOP describes the operations of the City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Center (EOC), which is the central management entity responsible for directing and coordinating the various City of La Quinta departments and other agencies in their emergency response activities. The City's Emergency Services Division is responsible for both planning and implementation of emergency response efforts, and coordinates with other local jurisdictions and the County of Riverside in emergency response planning, training and disaster exercises. Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-10 October 2023 450 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS La Quinta General Plan Chapter IV of the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) addresses the various environmental hazards within the City of La Quinta. The environmental hazards specifically identified in the LQGP includes Noise, Soils and Geology, Flooding and Hydrology, and Hazardous Materials. Chapter IV's Hazardous Materials Element in Chapter IV addresses the potential hazards associated with the storage, use, and transport of hazardous materials in and throughout the City. Goal HAZ-1: Protection of residents from the potential impacts of hazardous and toxic materials. - Policy HAZ-1.1: The storage, transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials shall comply with all City, County, State and federal standards. o Program HAZ-1.1.a: Continue to coordinate with all appropriate agencies to assure that local, State and federal regulations are enforced. o Program HAZ-1.1.b: Development plans for projects which may store, use, or transport hazardous materials shall continue to be routed to the Fire Department and the Department of Environmental Health for review. - Policy HAZ-1.3: Support Household Hazardous Waste disposal. In the City, hazardous materials are limited to small quantity generators (those generating less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month), ranging from individual households to service stations and medical clinics. Household hazardous waste can be disposed of properly through Household Hazardous Waste disposal events, or at a network of "ABOP" (Antifreeze, Batteries, Oil, Paint) facilities operated by the County Waste Management Department. The Emergency Services Element of the LQGP addresses police and fire service, emergency medical response, and emergency preparedness within the City, which are essential services to the City and its residents. The goal within this element is to create an effective and comprehensive response to all emergency service needs. The City's preparedness for emergency situations, such as natural and man- made disasters, helps emergency services within La Quinta achieve this goal. La Quinta Environmental Impact Report The La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential impacts associated with the implementation of the City General Plan. The range of environmental issues associated with implementation of the General Plan, and evaluated in the LQGP EIR include land use compatibility, traffic and circulation, flooding and drainage, geotechnical and seismic safety, air quality, and hazards and hazardous materials. Noise impacts, visual resources, biological and cultural resources, the availability of public services and facilities and socio-economic impacts are also assessed. According to the LQGP EIR, increased growth within the City of La Quinta will not only result in an increased population susceptible to hazards and hazardous materials, but will include businesses and Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-11 October 2023 451 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS development project that use, store, and/or transport hazardous materials. The LQGP EIR sets forth mitigation measures to promote a safe environment for the residents and visitors within the City. The mitigation outlined within the LQGP EIR potentially relevant to the proposed Project includes: 1. The City will ensure that new generators of hazardous materials will comply with all local, State, and federal regulations, as required by law. 2. The City will work with Riverside County Fire, Caltrans, CHP, and other local, State, or federal agencies to regulate the transport of hazardous materials along local roadways, state highways, and railways that run through the City or in the vicinity. 4. The City shall update the Emergency Operations Plan as necessary to address and plan for synchronized response to potential emergencies including release or spills of hazardous materials. The Public Services and Utilities Element of the LQGP EIR states that fire services are provided through a contract with the Riverside County Fire Department, which also serves the Sphere of Influence (Sol) areas. There are three city -owned fire stations, each staffed with full-time paid and volunteer firefighters. Emergency response in the Planning Area is also available through Riverside County Fire Department stations in other cities. Average Fire Department response times are between 5 and 7 at the time the LQGP EIR was written. La Quinta has an Insurance Service Office (ISO) of 4, based on a scale of 1 through 10, with 1 being the highest rating. Ratings are reviewed periodically. A variety of criteria are used to determine the ISO rating, such as staffing levels, response times, safety history and building code standards. The LQGP EIR requires, as mitigation, coordination of new development proposals with affected agencies, the payment of required fees designed to offset impacts, and the continued conservation and reduction of the use of resources to reduce impacts to fire services. 4.9.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following standards and criteria for establishing significance of potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials were derived from the CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. Development of the proposed project would have a significant effect to if it is determined that the project would: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-12 October 2023 452 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Methodology This section discusses the methods used to assess the Project's impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials. This section also analyzes impacts associated with the project that may potentially affect public health and safety or degrade the environment. This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment regarding proposed land uses, as well as public resources provided by the Department of Toxic Substances, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the US Environmental Protection Agency. A search of these databases was completed in November 2021. Additional federal, state, and local programs and regulations related to hazards and the use of hazardous materials are referenced in this section. These sources were also used to gauge the potential impact of the development of the Project's proposed off -site utility field. The proposed offsite improvements include the development of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre substation. The exact locations of the offsite improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located east of the project site, generally located between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west as shown on Exhibit 3.3, Site Location Map, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. A review of the Travertine Specific Plon, Avenue 60/Madison Street, Lo Quinto, CA, Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, prepared by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) in May 2021, was also included in this analysis. The Radius Map Report includes a summary of findings of the various government databases where information on potential environmental conditions (PEC) or recognized environmental conditions (REC) at nearby sites is documented. This report is included as Appendix 1.1 of this Draft EIR. Note: the area delineated in the EDR report represents that area of the project site where the abandoned vineyard is located. The remaining areas on site, do not exhibit evidence that hazardous materials may have been used in the past based on the past vacant character of the site, and historical aerial imagery. The approximate center of the site was identified in order to complete a search of properties within a radius to identify any off -site PECs or RECs, including areas proposed for the offsite utility field. The GeoCheck review identified nine sites in the Project vicinity, but not on the Project site (further analysis provided in discussion d.). Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-13 October 2023 453 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS In January 2023, Geo Forward prepared a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to evaluate any potential environmental condition as they exist at the project site. In order to evaluate the site, Geo Forward's analysis included: • A review of available current and historical topographic, geologic, and hydro -geologic information pertaining to the project, along with aerial photographs and fire insurance maps of the project and surrounding areas; • A review of City directories and available information regarding the historical land use and activities of the project; • A physical inspection of the project to visually and physically observe the current property conditions for evidence of potential RECs; • A review of regulatory database reports provided by Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) (a review within a 1-mile radius of the project site with regards to the EPA's National Priority List Sites and State Superfund Sites; • A limited review of federal, state, and local regulatory information records for reported potential environmental hazards on or in the vicinity of the project; • A limited evaluation of adjacent properties based on visual inspection interviews with site personnel and government records; and • Interviews with any of the following available parties: the current property owner, the client, local agency clerks, and real estate affiliates. The multiple records and database searches conducted by Geo Forward did not uncover records associated with the project site. However, a review of the historical aerial maps identified the onsite agricultural development in the northern portion of the project site, The agricultural activity was vineyard cultivation, and it is likely that the site was subjected to herbicides, pesticides, and/or fungicides. On January 4, 2023, Geo Forward conducted a physical inspection of the project site to assess the possible presence of environmental conditions and other non-ASTM environmental issues. During their site inspection, Geo Forward observed evidence of illegal disposal/abandonment of hazardous substances, and apparent asbestos containing materials (ACMs) including asbestos -cement piping. The findings of Geo Forward's records search and site inspection is analyzed under threshold discussion d. Project Impacts a&b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous waste; or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-14 October 2023 454 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment The approximately 855-acre Project proposes a mixed -use development containing 378.8 acres of residential, 84.5 acres of resort/golf and banquet facilities, 35 acres of master planned roadways, and 357.1 acres of open space uses. The Project also proposes an off -site utility field, which includes a 2.5- acre substation and five well sites within a 2-mile radius of the Project's northern and northeastern boundaries. The use of hazardous waste during project construction and operation is discussed below. Construction As formerly mentioned, a portion of the property was previously utilized as a vineyard. Therefore, stockpiles of used trellis slats are located within the property. It is assumed that the trellis slats were pressure treated, which is common in vineyard operations. The project areas that are intended for future development will be cleared and grubbed. As part of this activity, any pressure treated wood or associated agricultural waste will be collected and hauled to an approved landfill. All onsite waste will be handled and disposed of in accordance with local ordinances and State and federal regulatory requirements to reduce the risk of an accidental release. The Project site has not operated as a vineyard for approximately 15 years. According to the Phase I ESA prepared by Geo Forward, it is likely that herbicides and pesticides were used during the vineyard operations, which can result in the presence of residual hazardous materials in shallow soils. Additionally, during the site inspection, Geo Forward observed debris on the southern half of the Project property. The observed items included construction debris, asbestos -cement piping (ACM), and unlabeled, rusted drums and containers the shape and size of paint cans, paint thinner cans, oil, kerosine, and other potentially hazardous materials. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 is recommended to ensure that residual volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and/or pesticides/herbicides originating from prior agricultural uses are appropriately handled during soil site disturbance. Additionally, if hazardous materials are identified that are above acceptable levels, a site -specific Soils Management Plan (SMP) shall be developed for the Project site to describe the protocol for managing and disposing of potentially hazardous soils and debris. The SMP shall be implemented during excavation and grading of the Project, as required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-2. All agricultural related debris, materials, and foundations, including the remaining vineyard trellis system, shall be removed and hauled to an appropriate landfill prior to land disturbance in the previous vineyard area. If significant soil staining is found at previous storage locations, stained soil should be assessed, excavated and disposed of in an approved landfill (Mitigation Measure HAZ-3). All phases of project construction (grading, trenching, construction, architectural coating, street paving, etc.) are expected to involve the temporary management and use of oils, petroleum -based fuels and other potentially flammable or toxic substances. The nature and quantities of these Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-15 October 2023 455 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS products would be limited to what is necessary to carry out construction of the project. Some of these materials would be transported to the site periodically by vehicle and would be stored in designated controlled areas on a short-term basis. The designated controlled areas will be temporarily located in staging areas typically placed close to where development is occurring at that time. The staging areas would move to a new location when construction of one area, or phase, is complete, and construction of a new area will occur. The identification of building material staging areas is required by Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010- 0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ), which requires the development and implementation of a project - specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for areas greater than one acre, and administered by the RWQCB. Per the CGP, the project's SWPPP shall include comprehensive handling and management procedures for building materials, including those that are hazardous and toxic. Paints, solvents, pesticides, fuels and oils, other hazardous materials or any building materials that have the potential to contaminate stormwater would be stored indoors or under cover or in areas with secondary containment. The designation of staging areas for activities involving the use of hazardous materials, such as fueling vehicles, mixing paints, plaster, or mortar, is also required to be determined in the SWPPP. When handled properly by trained individuals and consistent with the manufacturer's instructions and industry standards, the risk involved with handling these materials is considerably reduced to a less than significant level. As a requirement of the CGP, the contractor will be required to identify all controlled staging areas within the project limits for storing materials and equipment. Furthermore, to prevent a threat to surface water during construction, the management of potentially hazardous materials and other potential pollutant sources will be regulated through the implementation of measures required in the SWPPP for the project. The SWPPP requires a list of potential pollutant sources and the identification of construction areas where additional control measures are necessary to prevent pollutants from being released on -site or into the surroundings. Best management practices (BMPs) are required in the SWPPP for proper material delivery and storage; material use; and spill prevention and control. These temporary measures outline the required physical improvements and procedures to prevent impacts of pollutants and hazardous materials to workers and the environment during construction. For example, all construction materials, including paints, solvents, and petroleum products, must be stored in controlled areas and according to the manufacturer's specifications and the contractor will also be required to implement BMPs to assure that impacts are minimized and that any minor spills are immediately and properly remediated. In addition, perimeter controls (fencing with wind screen), linear sediment barriers (gravel bags, fiber rolls, or silt fencing), and access restrictions (gates) would help prevent temporary impacts. The required plan will identify the locations and types of construction activities requiring BMPs and other necessary compliance measures to prevent soil erosion and stormwater runoff pollution. The SWPPP may include, but is not limited to, the following BMPs: Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-16 October 2023 456 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS • Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: watering of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non-stormwater Management: clear water diversion and dewatering; and • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management. All hazardous materials would be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with local ordinances and State and federal regulatory requirements to reduce the risk of an accidental spill. Lastly, and upon project completion of construction, all hazardous materials would be removed from the Project site. The development and implementation of the SWPPP during construction of the proposed Project, and in compliance with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, is required as Mitigation Measure HAZ-4. As previously stated, this mitigation measure will establish BMPs to ensure the proper use or disposal of hazardous materials and waste associated with construction of the Project. Additionally, the BMPs required within the SWPPP would avoid the accidental release of hazardous materials during construction of the Project site. With Mitigation Measure HAZ-4 in place, Project construction would result in less than significant impacts. Off -site utility field improvements include the construction of a 2.5-acre Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation and the development of five off -site wells. Similar to onsite improvements, construction of the off -site utility field improvements is expected to involve the temporary management and use of oils, fuels and other potentially flammable substances. Therefore, construction activities associated with the off -site utility field would require the implementation of appropriate BMPs, such as implementing perimeter controls (fencing with wind screen), restricted access, and identifying controlled areas where construction materials must be stored, in order to reduce the risk of spills and leaks of hazardous materials used. Additionally, the development of the wells and substation will be constructed in compliance with CVWD and IID standards regarding their facilities. Therefore, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. Operation The proposed mixed -use project includes a resort, commercial, residential, and recreational and open space uses on approximately 855 acres of vacant land. The regular operation of the proposed project does not involve copious amounts of hazardous materials. The handling, application, and storage of cleaning agents, building maintenance products, paints, solvents, and other related substances is expected to occur within the project in order to carry out the necessary operations in each facility or Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-17 October 2023 457 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS use. However, these materials would not be present in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety, or the environment. Residential Approximately 378.8 acres of the project site are designated to low and medium density residential uses. Residential land uses do not typically result in the use of excessive amounts of hazardous materials, or the routine transport of hazardous materials. The handling, application, and storage of household cleaning products, paints, solvents, and other related household substances are expected to occur in small quantities. Resort Planning Areas 1 and 11 includes resort/spa and resort/golf land uses. A resort and wellness spa are planned for an approximately 38.3-acre site located at the northwest entrance to the project from Jefferson Street (Planning Area 1). This area will consist of resort related amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities; tennis, yoga, walking and hiking trails. These facilities would likely use similar cleaning products that are labeled as hazardous, therefore, no significant hazard to the public or the environment would occur in Planning Area 1. Planning Area 11 proposes a resort/golf course training facility on approximately 46.2 acres in the eastern portion of the site. Uses will likely include a practice facility and entertainment/banquet facility for both the residents and guests. These facilities would likely use similar cleaning products that are labeled as hazardous; however, these products are not anticipated to be used in significant quantities. Therefore, no significant hazard to the public or the environment would occur in Planning Area 11. Golf The golf training facility proposed would likely include a storage/maintenance area where golf carts would be stored, serviced and maintained; and another building where landscape equipment as well as hazardous materials associated with landscape maintenance (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides) would be stored. The golf carts will be stored in a Cart Barn with proper wash bay drainage with clarifier. The maintenance yard for the proposed project will require proper storage bays that will not allow run off. Wash bays will be required for maintenance equipment, and storage tanks will be required for equipment fuel. Onsite storage and maintenance areas may include hazardous materials associated with landscape maintenance (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides), as well as the maintenance of golf carts and other equipment used onsite. If the site stores hazardous materials and/or wastes in quantities greater than or equal to 55 gallons of a liquid substance, 500 pounds of a solid substance, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, the site is considered a Hazardous Materials Handler. Therefore, the applicant may Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-18 October 2023 458 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS be required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the Riverside County Fire Department that identifies the hazardous materials to be used and stored on site, the location of the storage area, an emergency contingency plan showing how spills would be cleaned up, and any other information required in an HMBP. HMBPs must include at least the following: • A list of the chemical name and common names of every hazardous substance or chemical product handled by the business; • The category of waste, including the general chemical and mineral composition, of every hazardous waste handled by the business; • The maximum amount of each hazardous material or mixture containing a hazardous material that is present onsite; • Sufficient information on how and where the hazardous materials are handled by the business to allow fire, safety, health, and other appropriate personnel to prepare adequate emergency responses to potential releases of the hazardous materials; • Emergency response plans and procedures in the event of a reportable release or threatened release of a hazardous material; and • Training for all new employees and annual training, including refresher courses, for all employees on safety procedures in the event of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material. A project HMBP is required as Mitigation Measure HAZ-5. Alternatively, Mitigation Measure HAZ-5, authorizes the applicant to provide evidence to the Riverside County Fire Department and CALFIRE that the activities that will occur within this facility would not rise to the level requiring an HMBP. Under the administration of the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health (DEH), and in compliance with the Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law, Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), any business handling and/or storing a hazardous material shall obtain a permit from the DEH and electronically submit a business plan in the Statewide Informational Management System. Should any component of the proposed Project require the storage or handling of hazardous materials in quantities greater than or equal to 55 gallons of a liquid substance, 500 pounds of a solid substance, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, it shall be required to follow the procedures established in Chapter 6.95 of the HSC. This is required as Mitigation Measure HAZ-6. Compliance with these procedures and the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-5 and HAZ-6 will ensure that impacts due to the use, transport and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant during project operation. Furthermore, the materials required for the maintenance of landscaped areas (i.e., fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) and the proposed buildings will be stored onsite and regulated by State and local law, including Fire Department regulations requiring proper storage and inspection. These regulations, including those imposed by both the County of Riverside and the Fire Department, are designed to Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-19 October 2023 459 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS lower impacts to less than significant levels. Compliance with these procedures will ensure that the use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials would not impact the public or environment or result in the accidental release of hazardous materials. Less than significant impacts are anticipated during project operation. Resort Pools The Project proposes the development of a resort/spa, which is likely to include a community pool. The California Department of Public Health is authorized to establish standards for public swimming facilities. According to Section 65529, Public Pool Disinfection, of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), it is required that public pools, when open or in use, be disinfected continuously by a chemical that imparts a disinfectant consistent with minimum and maximum concentrations, also determined in Section 65529. If halogens other than chlorine are used, residuals of equivalent strength shall be maintained. Records of the routine maintenance and repairs are also required per the CCR. Additionally, the pool operator shall maintain a test kit for measuring the disinfectant residual, pH and, if used, cyanuric acid concentration in the public pool. The resort pools shall be required to adhere to all applicable standards and regulations within the CCR, the California Building Code and the California Electrical Code regarding public swimming pools. The enforcing agency that would evaluate the plans for the resort pools prior to construction would be the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. Off -Site Utility Field The operation of the off -site substation and wells would include the routine transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials associated with the maintenance of the facilities. However, the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment associated with the proposed substation will be overseen by IID, which has programs in place to manage such releases, as they operate multiple substations. The maintenance of the off -site wells is likely to include chemicals, such as chlorine, to disinfect well water. Routine maintenance of the off -site wells will be conducted by CVWD. Similar to IID, CVWD has programs in place to manage the storage, handling, use, and disposal of chemicals used during operation of their facilities. Therefore, the use of hazardous materials associated with the offsite improvements will result in less than significant impacts. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as CEQA lead agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school Under CEQA Guideline 15186, additional notification and consultation requirements may apply to projects with one -quarter mile of an existing school facility. The Project site is not located within mile of an existing or proposed school. The nearest school to the project site is the Westside Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-20 October 2023 460 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Elementary School located at 82225 Airport Boulevard in Thermal, approximately 2.7 miles northeast of the Project site. Offsite improvements include the construction and operation of a 2.5-acre substation within a 2-mile radius of the Project site's northern and northeastern boundaries and the development of up to five wells in a utility field area. The substation is proposed in vacant lots south of Avenue 58, which lies over % mile from the closest existing school (Westside Elementary School, approximately 0.30 miles from utility field area). Therefore, the Project's proposed onsite and offsite improvements will have no impact on schools as it relates to hazardous materials. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as CEQA lead agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment The approximately 855-acre project property proposes a mixed -use development that will include residential, resort/spa, resort/golf, and open space land uses on the southern -most tip of the City of La Quinta. The project property is currently vacant; however, a cultivated vineyard once occupied approximately 220 acres of the project site for several years. The vineyard included grape vines, irrigation lines and access roads, but has been abandoned since 2007. Pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 and its subsections, record searches on the Project property were performed within multiple database platforms. The findings are provided as follows. A search of the project site on available federal, State, and local government listings was performed by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) (Appendix 1.1). The record search by EDR was designed to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquires (40 CRF Part 312), the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Purposes (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. The EDR Radius Map Report did not identify the Project site as a hazardous materials site. Although the Project property was not listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the use of hazardous materials prior agricultural operations on approximately 220 acres of the Project could have resulted in the use of hazardous materials onsite. Hazardous material uses potentially associated with agriculture activities includes the application of pesticides and vehicle/equipment maintenance fuel. Based on historical imagery, the vineyard activities started between 1984 and 1985. During operation of the vineyard, it is likely that pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers were periodically utilized for pest management to maintain overall plant health, which is Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-21 October 2023 461 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS typical of agricultural practices. Pesticides and herbicides vary widely in toxicity and persistence in the soil. Pesticides that degrade slowly over time can leave residues in crops or soil. Residue from agricultural activities dissipate or decay, allowing the residue to disappear from the plant or soil. Dissipation rates can range from hours to years, which varies by the chemical applied and plants affected. Additionally, weather, such as heat, can increase dissipation and decay rates. As previously stated, historical aerial imagery indicates that the vineyard onsite has been abandoned and cleared of onsite equipment since 2007. The State of California has regulated agricultural practices and pesticide use since 1901, however, it wasn't until the 1970s that pesticides began to be more heavily regulated by the California Department of Agriculture (CDA). The agricultural operations that occurred on the Project site between 1985 and 2007 were subject to comply with the regulations in place during the time of vineyard operation. The site has been cleared of agricultural equipment since 2007, however, trellises remain onsite. Trellis slats are assumed to be pressure treated, which is common in vineyard operations. Apart from the trellises, the site was cleared of all agricultural equipment when the vineyard operations ended. According to the project -specific Phase I ESA, the vineyard operations likely used pesticides and herbicides, which could result in the presence of residual hazardous chemicals in the shallow soils. In addition to the possible use of pesticides and herbicides at the project site, reconnaissance of the project site, conducted as part of the Phase I ESA, identified debris on the southern half of the Subject Property most likely associated with illegal dumping. The observed items included construction debris, asbestos -cement piping (ACM), and unlabeled, rusted drums and containers the shape and size of paint cans, paint thinner cans, oil, kerosine, and other potentially hazardous materials. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 is recommended to ensure that residual volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and/or pesticides/herbicides originating from prior agricultural uses are appropriately handled during soil site disturbance. Additionally, if chemical levels are identified that exceed existing acceptable standards, a Soils Management Plan (SMP) shall be developed and implemented during excavation and grading for the project. The SMP would describe the protocol for managing potentially contaminated soils and disposing of (potentially hazardous) debris, as well as guidelines for handling known and/or undocumented subsurface features that may be encountered. This is required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-2. Moreover, all agricultural related debris, materials, and foundations shall be removed and hauled to an appropriate landfill prior to land disturbance in the previous vineyard area. If significant soil staining is found at previous storage locations, stained soil shall be excavated and disposed of in an approved landfill (Mitigation Measure HAZ-3). Onsite well sites were assumed to be operable during the previous operation of the vineyards, therefore, if onsite wells are determined to be inoperable, they shall be properly capped and abandoned prior to grading activities in the existing well sites areas. The Phase I ESA recommends Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-22 October 2023 462 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS obtaining a copy of all documents pertaining to the onsite private groundwater wells, if available. Monitoring well conditions should be identified to ensure proper maintenance or abandonment under the appropriate regulatory oversight, as well as practicing caution when developing, grading, or excavating at the project site. This is required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-7. Finally, upon inspection of the project, the presence of asbestos -cement piping was found present within the project site. Due to limitations of inspecting the entirety of the project site and the apparent presence of the asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) and potential asbestos -containing materials (PACMs), the Project shall consult an asbestos inspection consultant for a comprehensive asbestos survey prior to demolition, construction, or remodeling of the project site. ACMs and PCMs in good condition can remain onsite for future use, and managed safely under the regulations of a site -specific Operations and Maintenance (0&M) Plan or hauled to an approved landfill. Mitigation Measure HAZ-8 shall implement the asbestos inspection consultation and the development of the 0&M Plan. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through -3, -7, and -8 potential impacts of hazardous materials potentially on the project site would be reduced to less than significant levels. In addition to the record search conducted by EDR, Geo Forward, and pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 and its subsections, three additional resources were consulted in November 2021. These included GeoTracker, EnviroStor, and the EPA Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) databases. The database searches did not identify any records of a registered site within the project property. The GeoTracker and EnviroStor databases did not identify any Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Sites, Cleanup Program Sites, Land Disposal Sites, Military Sites, DTSC Hazardous Waste Permits, DTSC Cleanup Sites, or Permitted Underground Storage Tanks on the project property. Additionally, the ECHO database did not identify violations regarding the CAA, CWA, RCRA, SDWA or TRI on the project site. After the search of the three databases, it can be concluded that the Project is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Moreover, development and operation of the project will not create significant risks or hazards to the public or the environment, since the Project operations (i.e., resort and residential) does not involve copious amounts of hazardous materials. The handling, application, and storage of cleaning agents, building maintenance products, paints, solvents, golf course maintenance chemicals and other related substances is expected to occur within the project in order to carry out the necessary operations in each facility or use. However, these materials would not be present in sufficient quantities to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Overall, impacts will be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-5 and HAZ-6 evaluated in discussion a., above. Additionally, the Project property would not be impacted by existing offsite facilities listed on hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, since the Project property is isolated from surrounding areas by Dike No. 4 and the Guadelupe Dike. Thus, if hazardous materials Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-23 October 2023 463 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS were to be released east or north of the dikes, the incident would not impact the Project property. Additionally, the uses in proximity to the Project property generally include residential communities, which, similar to the Project property, do not anticipate the use or storage of hazardous materials (see discussion a). Therefore, impacts are less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field Pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 and its subsections, record searches for the off -site utility field area were performed within multiple database platforms. Project -related off -site utility field improvements include the development of a 2.5-acre substation and five well sites. Although the exact locations of these facilities have not been determined, they are proposed to be located within a 2-mile radius of the Project's northern and northeastern boundaries, as shown on Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map. The database search identified two sites listed within the GeoTracker database and eight sites within ECHO's database. The two sites discovered in the GeoTracker database includes KSL PGA West Weiskoff/Nicklaus, at 80202 Avenue 58, approximately 2 miles northwest of the Project boundaries, and Desert Lake Shore Ranch at 82455 Avenue 65, approximately 2 miles southeast of the Project site. Both of these sites are registered as LUST Cleanup Sites, with statuses of "Completed — Case Closed." The facilities listed within the GeoTracker database are regulated by State reporting programs. Due to the developed character of these registered sites, the off -site utility field is not likely to be located on these properties. ECHO's database search identified eight sites. The closest site to the Project boundary is the Golf Club at La Quinta, at 81252 Avenue 62, northeast of the Avenue 62 Project entrance. Brighton Dist., located approximately 0.70 miles east of the Project, at 81935 Avenue 62, is the second registered site. Another registered site is Coral Option I, LLC DBA Andalusia Country Club, located approximately 0.82 miles northeast of the Project, at 81120 Avenue 60. Additional registered sites include Imperial Irrigation District substation at 81600 Avenue 58; LQR Golf LLC DBA West Nicklaus Weiskopf Golf Maintenance at 80202 Avenue 58; Mckeever Waterwell and Pump Service at 82550 Avenue 60; and Logan Landscape, Inc. at 60225 Jackson Street. Each of the sites listed above are registered by the RCRA as an active other facility, and do not have violations. The eighth site, Capistrano, is located west of Monroe Street and north of Avenue 58 and registered in the ECHO database as a minor general permit covered facility for construction stormwater under the CWA. This site also does not have violations. The off -site utility field is not likely to be located on or impacted by these registered sites, due to their developed character and their no violation status. EnviroStor did not list sites within the 2-mile radius area. The EDR Report identified one site on the Torres -Martinez Reservation, located approximately one mile east of the project. The Torres -Martinez Reservation is listed in the EDR Report as an "Indian Reservation" (INDIAN RESERV). The Indian Reservation does not include operational activities that generate hazardous materials or waste. Additionally, the INDIAN RESERV database and the EDR Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-24 October 2023 464 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS records search did not indicate that the Reservation includes hazardous materials or release of hazardous materials. Therefore, the registered site will not affect the off -site utility field. After the database searches, it can be concluded that the sites listed are not anticipated to affect the off -site utility field improvements due to their distance to these sites, their developed character, and their current registered statuses. Additionally, development and operation of the off -site project components will not create significant risks or impacts associated with the registered sites, due to the project's distance from the registered sites. Moreover, the off -site utility field operations are managed and monitored in compliance with CVWD and IID operational standards regarding hazardous material handling and storage, as evaluated in discussion a). e. Located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area The Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport is located at 56-850 Higgins Drive in Thermal, California approximately 5.4 miles northeast of the future Avenue 62 entrance to the project site, and approximately 6 miles northeast of the future Jefferson Street entrance to the project site. The Project site is outside the Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone. The offsite improvements are proposed to be located more than 2 miles west of the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport. Therefore, the site's location in relation to the airport indicates that the Project will not be impacted by an airport -related safety hazard or excessive noise that could impact Project residents, employees or visitors to the project. f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan The Project property is located in a relatively isolated area surrounded on the west and south by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area; on the east by agricultural land and residential communities, and on the north and northeast by the CVWD Dike No. 4 impoundment area and Coral Mountain. North and northeast of this area are residential communities, vacant parcels that are designated for residential use, and Lake Cahuilla. There is currently no paved public access to the Project property. An unpaved road exists from the north which in the future will be the extension of Jefferson Street. On the east, Avenue 62 stops at the toe of Dike No. 4. Future access would be provided by the extension of Avenue 62 across the Dike and the impoundment area and onto the site to connect to Jefferson Street. A project -specific Fire Master Plan was completed for the Project to determine the level of service and ensure emergency response would be available at the Project property during the development of the first 600 residential units. The Project's consistency with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan is discussed in detail in Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-25 October 2023 465 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Section 4.19, Wildfire, in this Draft EIR. Impacts were determined to be less than significant. Please consult Section 4.19 for further discussion of project impacts on emergency response and evacuation plans. g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires According to the City of La Quinta's Emergency Services Division Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), a wildfire as an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels and damaging or possibly destroying structures. Areas where wildfires could impact communities include Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) areas, which includes the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland and vegetation fuels. Proximity of new neighborhoods to wildland areas, coupled with the prolonged drought conditions the Coachella Valley has experienced in recent years that has resulted in excessively dry vegetation, increases the risk of wildfires. The Project site is located in the southern portion of the City. According to CAL FIRE's Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map', the Project does not lie in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). The southern and southeastern sides of the property, however, abuts areas designated as "Moderate" FHSZ (see Exhibit 4.9-1 below). Section 4.19, Wildfires, further analyzes the potential impact of wildfires to the Project site. See Section 4.19 for in-depth analysis. The potential for wildfire threats to impact people and structures was determined to be less than significant. 1 CAL FIRE Website, Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps, Riverside County. https:Hosfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community- wildfire-prepared ness-and-mitigation/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/ Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-26 October 2023 466 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS •y. i= 2... h. mld by JMIY Cco %%ber FIRE KAZARD SEVERITY Z01*E MAP TRAVERTINE •4. r� • -; �di#L MI La Omnt:ar m �-mUec F A��r EVii' ff 4A.1 4.9.5 Cumulative Impacts Hazardous materials and risk of upset conditions are largely site -specific, and would occur on a case - by -case basis for each individual development areas within the Project. All new developments in the City are required to evaluate potential threats to public safety, including those associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment during construction and operation, emergency response, transport/use/disposal of hazardous materials, and hazards to sensitive receptors (including schools). Similarly, all projects would be required to analyze and properly mitigate any impacts to the existing evacuation plan, if impacts are identified. During construction, developers are required to implement best management practices established in the project -specific SWPPP, in compliance with the Construction General Permit. The implementation of the SWPPP designates areas for the storage of hazardous materials, as well as handling procedures for hazardous materials. Additionally, materials used during construction will be stored, handled, and transported per manufacturer instructions, thereby reducing likelihood of accidental release. See Mitigation Measure HIAZ-4 and Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-27 October 2023 467 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS of this Draft EIR for further discussion of the SWPPP. Finally, construction of the cumulative projects are not likely to occur at the same time. Construction timing for the cumulative projects would likely occur before or after the project, depending on their entitlement status within the City. The operation of individual projects is regulated by local, State, and federal standards on a project - by -project basis. For example, an individual project may be required to implement a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) if the project uses or stores of hazardous materials greater than or equal to 55 gallons of a liquid substance, 500 pounds of a solid substance, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas. This plan is submitted to the Riverside County Fire Department and required by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. With the implementation of local, State, and federal regulations for the proposed project and individual future projects, cumulative impacts would not be significant. Moreover, an individual project's location near an existing or proposed school will be analyzed on a project -by -project basis. Specific land uses, such as residential and commercial retail are typically located near school facilities. Generally, the operation of residential and commercial retail land uses does not result in the emission or handling of hazardous materials. However, as previously stated, the uses proposed in proximity to a school facility will be analyzed on a project -by -project basis to ensure impacts to schools are less than significant, and do not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Similarly, individual projects registered on a hazardous materials site (pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5) would also be analyzed on a project -by -project basis to ensure projects identify registered hazardous sites, and appropriate mitigation, if necessary. The Bermuda Dunes Airport is located approximately 0.60 miles north of the City of La Quinta's boundary, while the Jacqueline Cochran Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles east of the City's boundary. Development of future projects will be required to analyze their individual potential to result in a safety hazard or excessive noise if located within the surrounding airports' land use plan. This will be reviewed on a project -by -project basis and would not result in cumulative impacts. The individual projects within the City of La Quinta would be required to comply with all applicable code and ordinances of the La Quinta Fire Department for access, water mains, fire flows, and fire hydrants. Moreover, the City and La Quinta Fire Department will review individual project to ensure emergency access is provided and that the individual projects do not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. The western and southern portions of the City are located near areas identified as having a wildfire risk associated with the slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains and its foothills. However, as stated in threshold discussion g, above, the slopes do not contain vegetative fuel conducive to wildfires. Future projects would be required to implement appropriate emergency fire access roads, infrastructure (i.e., fire hydrants), and design features (i.e., landscape plans promoting defensible space if located near a high fire hazard area). These measures will be applied on a project -by -project basis and Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-28 October 2023 468 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS reviewed by the La Quinta Fire Department to ensure adequate emergency access and to reduce potential impacts of wildfires. See Section 4.19, Wildfires, in this Draft EIR. Adherence to federal, State, and regional regulatory standards will ensure impacts related to the release of hazardous materials associated with the project and future projects will assure that the cumulative impacts associated with hazardous materials remain less than significant. 4.9.6 Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 Prior to grading, Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be required. The Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be conducted by an Environmental Professional as defined in Section 312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312. • Per Section 312.10, an Environmental Professional is an environmental consultant that has an accredited education in earth or natural science, at least five years of formal training under another environmental professional, a professional state license, and maintains expert knowledge in the environmental geology, sustainability, and engineering fields. HAZ-2 A site -specific Soils Management Plan (SMP) shall be developed by an Environmental Professional forthe Project property if chemical levels exceeding regulatory thresholds are identified during the Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation. The SMP shall be implemented during excavation and grading of the Project, and describe the protocol for managing (potentially contaminated) soils and disposing of (potentially hazardous) debris, as well as guidelines for handling known and/or undocumented subsurface features if discovered. HAZ-3 All agricultural related debris, materials, and foundations shall be removed and hauled to an appropriate landfill prior to land disturbance in the previous vineyard area. If significant soil staining is found at previous storage locations, stained soil shall be excavated and disposed of in an approved landfill. HAZ-4 In compliance with the Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order No. 2009-009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ), the Project shall develop and implement a project -specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction of the project. The SWPPP shall include comprehensive handling, storage, and management procedures for building materials, especially those that are hazardous and toxic. The designation of staging areas for activities (i.e., fueling and maintaining vehicles, mixing paints, plaster, mortar, etc.), and storage of hazardous materials (i.e., paints, solvents, pesticides, fuels, oils, etc.) shall be determined in the SWPPP. Best management practices (BMPs) are required in the SWPPP that demonstrate proper Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-29 October 2023 469 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS material delivery and storage; material use; and spill prevention and control. The SWPPP may include, but is not limited to, the following BMPs: • Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: watering of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non-stormwater Management: clear water diversion and dewatering; and • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management. Lastly, and upon project completion of construction, all hazardous materials shall be removed from the project site and a Notice of Termination (NOT) shall be filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board. HAZ-5 Prior to the development of the golf facility storage and maintenance facilities, the applicant shall provide a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the Riverside County Fire Department for review and approval, if necessary. The HMBP shall be kept up to date in a location on -site and be available for review by the Riverside County Fire Department, as needed. HAZ-6 Should any component of the proposed Project require the storage or handling of hazardous materials in quantities greater than or equal to 55 gallons of a liquid substance, 500 pounds of a solid substance, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, it shall be required to follow the procedures established in Chapter 6.95 of the HSC, which requires any business handling and/or storing a hazardous material shall obtain a permit from the DEH and electronically submit a business plan in the Statewide Informational Management System, under the administration of the County of Riverside DEH. HAZ-7 If onsite wells are determined to be inoperable, they shall be properly capped and abandoned prior to grading activities in the existing wellsite areas. HAZ-8 The Project shall consult an asbestos inspection consultant for a comprehensive asbestos survey prior to demolition of the project site. 4.9.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Through compliance with existing regulations and standards identified in this section, the adherence to federal, state, and regional regulatory standards, as well as the implementation of Mitigation Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-30 October 2023 470 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Measure HAZ-1 through HAZ-8, development and operation of the project would result in less than significant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. 4.9.8 References 1. Enforcement and Compliance History, Environmental Protection Agency, https://echo.epa.gov/facilities/facility-search/results, accessed February 2022. 2. EnviroStor, Department of Toxic Substance Control, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed February 2022. 3. GeoTracker, State Water Resources Control Board, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed February 2022. 4. Travertine Specific Plan, Avenue 60/Madison Street, La Quinta, CA, Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, prepared by Environmental Data Resources (EDR), May 2021. Travertine Draft EIR 4.9-31 October 2023 471 Page intentionally blank 472 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.10.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to establish the Project environmental setting for purposes of hydrology and water quality, identify both the applicable thresholds of significance and the project's potentially significant impacts to hydrology and water quality, and identify mitigation measures capable of reducing any potentially significant impacts to hydrology and water quality to below a level of significance. The analysis is based on information provided in this EIR and supporting technical reports and EIR appendices, and reference documents cited throughout this section, as these provide the relevant background information. The analysis primarily relies on the hydrology, surface drainage, and water quality data and information described in the Travertine Project Preliminary Hydrology Study for Tentative Tract Map 37387, prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. in November of 2021; Travertine Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. in September of 2021; Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan (Drainage Master Plan), prepare by Q3 Consulting in June of 2021; Water Supply Assessment/Verification for the Travertine Specific Plan Project, prepared by The Altum Group on February 2018; Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification, Travertine Specific Plan Project, June 24, 2021. Primary considerations for this hydrology and surface water quality assessment include the prevailing rainfall characteristics for the Project region and the physical setting at the watershed and local level, as these determine the existing and proposed surface drainage conditions in which the proposed Project will be undertaken. The content and analysis in this section also relies on the hydrology, stormwater, and surface water quality regulatory framework, which regulates general and finite aspects of land development activities during the design, construction, and operational phases. The Drainage Master Plan report is provided in Appendix J.3 of this Draft EIR (Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan). Please consult Chapter 8.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR. 4.10.2 Existing Conditions Relevant Principles in Hydrology, Stormwater Management, and Groundwater Management Hydrology refers to the occurrence, distribution, and movement of surface water, including water found in rivers and stormwater drainage systems. Stormwater refers to the surface runoff and drainage resulting from rain events. Stormwater runoff and surface drainage patterns are determined by the soil Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-1 October 2023 473 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY conditions, topography, and associated gradients of the land. Surface water quality refers to selected physical, chemical, or biological characteristics found in stormwater in relation to an established standard. Groundwater is the water found underground in the voids in soil, sand, and rock. It is stored in and moves slowly through aquifers. Groundwater supplies are replenished, or recharged, by precipitation that seeps into the land's surface. In the Coachella Valley groundwater is also recharged by imported Colorado River water. This section in part analyzes how the principles of hydrology and urban runoff management will be implemented as part of the proposed project to address the relevant thresholds of significance pertaining to hydrology and water quality standards. The construction of homes, streets and other improvements results in an increase in impermeable surfaces and associated stormwater runoff. This result can increase the potential for flooding and for adverse impacts to surface and groundwater. The traditional process of urbanization and land development generally results in the conversion of a natural ground surface cover (pre -development condition) into a setting with higher impervious characteristics, occurring through the introduction of streets, buildings, and hardscape (post - development condition). Such development process typically results in a lower capacity to intercept, retain, and infiltrate stormwater runoff. Therefore, land development that is not regulated by hydrology and stormwater controls or principles can potentially result in a post -development condition in which 1) total stormwater runoff volume increases, 2) the runoff conveyance occurs more rapidly, and 3) the peak discharge is greater. The increase in runoff volume results from the decrease in infiltration and storage characteristics found in undeveloped land (pre -development). The shortened runoff conveyance time results from the greater flow velocities along impervious surfaces and drainage systems compared to a natural surface. The increase in peak discharge is the effect of larger runoff volume occurring over a shorter time compared to the pre -development condition. These effects of unregulated land development generally have the potential to result in degradation or modification to surface drainage, soil erosion and siltation, and water quality impairments. However, established regulatory mandates and engineering standards are designed to prevent flooding and adverse impacts to water quality and available resources. Stormwater management and adherence to surface water quality standards are achieved through required measures documented in compliance documents, rather than through voluntary actions, such that physical disturbance, vegetation clearing, earth movement, grading, and construction activities are not permitted without demonstrating compliance with permitting authorities and the pertinent regulations aimed at preventing stormwater impacts. The Coachella Valley groundwater basin is the primary groundwater source for the project region, with CVWD being the domestic water purveyor serving the project site. Based on a 1964 estimate by DWR, the Coachella Valley groundwater basin has an approximate storage capacity of 39.2 million acre-feet (AF) of water within the upper 1,000 feet and is divided into four subbasins: Indio, Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, and San Gorgonio. The project site is specifically underlain by the Indio Subbasin, which is Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-2 October 2023 474 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY also known as the Whitewater River Subbasin. DWR has estimated that the Indio Subbasin contains approximately 29.8 million AF of water in the first 1,000 feet below the ground surface, or approximately 76 percent of the total groundwater in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. CVWD works with other local water agencies and Coachella Valley stakeholders to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements and to implement water conservation, water reuse, and groundwater recharge strategies to ensure water availability and system capacity to meet the needs of the Coachella Valley. Regional Hydrologic Conditions The Project is located in the Lower Thermal Subbasin of the Whitewater Subbasin, which encompasses approximately 1,645 square miles. Within this watershed, an area of approximately 367 square miles (22 percent) encompassing most of the existing development in the Coachella Valley region, is regulated under the established Whitewater River Region Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4 Permit). The MS4 Permit coverage includes the entire project site. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD), Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) and the incorporated Coachella Valley cities, including La Quinta, have joint permittee responsibility for coordinating the regional MS4 Permit compliance programs and other activities aimed at reducing potential pollutants in urban runoff from land development construction, municipal, commercial, and industrial areas to the maximum extent possible. These public entities are generally in charge of stormwater management within their jurisdiction. Based on background information provided in the MS4 Permit, precipitation in the Whitewater River Region averages 3.6 inches per year. The Whitewater River Watershed is deemed to not have a defined rainy (wet) season, considering that convective rainfall events (summer thunderstorms) make up a large portion of Whitewater River Region annual rainfall, in contrast to the general winter precipitation that dominates rainfall events in western Riverside County and the coastal plains. When storms occur, they tend to be discrete convective cells, and feature short but intense rainfall, typical of monsoonal thunderstorms; individual storm events typically are localized and rarely affect the entire drainage network. Climatic conditions in the Coachella Valley are characterized as "subtropical desert". Mean annual rainfall is very low on the desert floor and into the foothills, ranging from 2 to 4 inches per year and averaging about 5 to 6 inches along the foothills. Generally, temperatures decrease and precipitation increases with increasing elevation. In some years no measurable rainfall has been reported on portions of the valley floor. Most of the valley's rainfall occurs during the cooler months of November through March, but occasional high -intensity thunderstorms and tropical storms occur in late summer and early fall. Although the ground may be generally dry at the beginning of a storm, sufficient amounts and intensities of rainfall can saturate the surface, substantially reducing percolation and increasing runoff. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-3 October 2023 475 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The Whitewater River Region is drained primarily by the Whitewater River that carries flows to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC), which outlets to the Salton Sea. It is worth noting that the Salton Sea body of water is not deemed part of the Whitewater River Watershed regulation, as it is separately managed and receives inflow from the Alamo River and New River in a separate watershed in Imperial County. Therefore, the Whitewater River Region includes the Coachella Valley surface drainage up to, but not including, the Salton Sea. In relation to the project site, CVSC is located approximately 7.5 miles to the east at its closest point. Surface drainage within the local watershed, including the Whitewater River and CVSC, generally consists of ephemeral washes and agricultural runoff. Due to soil type and the lack of interflow contributions, time and volume of flow in receiving waters after storm events are minimal. According to the MS4 Permit, Whitewater River flow in the Coachella Valley floor is so infrequent that several sections of the channel and its tributaries have been integrated into golf courses and residential communities. Drainage integration into residential and golf course developments in the Coachella Valley allows for proper stormwater controls under conditions that are actively maintained by private and public operators. Regional and local stormwater management facilities are deemed to be part of the MS4 system, of which CVWD and La Quinta are permittees. MS4 facilities include a system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains) designed for collecting and conveying stormwater. Storm drain facilities can be public or private. Examples of public facilities include pipes, gutters, channels, and basins occurring on the public right-of-way and/or maintained by a public agency. Private facilities are distinguished by being maintained separately by a private entity, such as homeowner's association and are therefore not part of the public MS4 infrastructure. Regional stormwater facilities serve the role of collecting and conveying runoff for areas outside or within the City, at such scale that they contribute to the regional watershed functions. In the planning area, regional facilities include a two-mile segment of CVSC, the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the Bear Creek System, the East La Quinta Channel and Lake Cahuilla. CVWD has broad flood control management responsibilities, which include planning, maintenance, and construction of improvements for these and other regional stormwater facilities. Local drainage management pertains to local facilities designed to collect and convey runoff from local streets and properties to the regional stormwater facilities noted above. These are represented in the City's Master Drainage Plan. Throughout this section, references to stormwater runoff, volumes, drainage, retention, and related dynamics, will pertain directly to the prevailing temporary ephemeral conditions occurring after precipitation events, in contrast to perennial drainage that occurs more permanently throughout the year, but is not applicable to the regional or local hydrologic setting. Discussions will also include references to the controlling (worst -case) one -hundred -year storm event (100-year), which is a storm event and resulting flood having a 1-percent chance of occurring in any given year particularly for the project area. The rainfall amount and resulting runoff characteristics from this type of event are used to Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-4 October 2023 476 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY determine the required storm drain system capacities, including inlets, pipes, channels, and retention facilities, which are subject to review and approval by the city engineer. Local Hydrologic Conditions and Existing Infrastructure The Project site is located on a bajada extending eastward from the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains toward the Eastern Coachella Valley floor. It is separated from the overall valley hydrological regime being isolated from regional drainage patterns by the BOR Dike 4 levee and the associated stormwater impound located immediately east of the proposed Project. The hydrologic setting of the Project is also defined by the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains and various associated canyon drainages (Devil Canyon and unnamed smaller drainages) west of the project site. Immediately north of the Project site is the existing Guadalupe Channel, which diverts and conveys canyon drainage into the Dike 4 impound. Some Project -affecting hillside runoff is also associated with a small portion of the Coral Rock formation on the north end of the Project. To the east and intervening between the Project site and the Dike 4 impound is the CVWD Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility which uses imported Colorado River water to recharge the lower valley aquifer. The Project setting can also be described as the lower extent of the watershed area tributary to Dike No. 4. Drainage from various canyons on the easterly front of the Santa Rosa Mountains occur along distributary flow paths and active alluvial fan conveyances to the engineered retention area on the west side of Dike No. 4. The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes, located off -site on the northern end of the project, are also designed to convey flows to Dike No. 4. The CVWD groundwater percolation ponds are presently protected from off -site drainage by a combination of earthen berms, rock lining, and concrete channelization. Approximately 220 acres of the project site were previously cleared and graded for vineyard facilities consisting of grape vines, irrigation equipment, and access roads. These improvements modified the natural vegetation and leveled topographic conditions in this 220-acre area for agricultural operations. Various boulder and earthen berms were constructed to divert and convey off -site drainage along the westerly, northerly, and southerly edges of the vineyard. The vineyards became inactive around 2007. Additional information about the local hydrologic conditions and existing infrastructure is provided in the relevant threshold discussions. The Project includes drainage and stormwater facilities and management that take into account the existing drainage conditions and support the existing drainage infrastructure. Q3 Consulting prepared a Project - specific Drainage Master Plan that provides a detailed watershed assessment, including regional and local hydrology, flood hazard analysis, and hydraulics for the proposed development. It also identifies the appropriate level of flood protection for the public, non-CVWD storm water facilities, and impacted CVWD storm water facilities that are consistent with the requirements and guidelines instituted by the City of La Quinta, CVWD, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Dike No. 4). Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-5 October 2023 477 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Based on the most current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM No. 06065C2900H), effective April 19, 2017, the Project site is located in Zone D, a FEMA designation which applies to areas of possible but undetermined or unmapped flood hazards. As such, there is a need to rely on the project -specific hydrology study, prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. and Drainage Master Plan to establish hydrologic conditions and to determine the necessary drainage system design and water quality management considerations. Based on the available tools and project constraints, the proposed area flood protection measures include a combination of perimeter embankments, and drainage swales along the westerly and southerly site development boundaries, and improvements to the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes on the north side. These facilities would intercept flood waters along the west and south boundary and convey the floodwaters around the site development area to the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes. The Project proposes to use a protected embankment, elevated fill, and a graded swale along the west boundary to collect and convey the unconfined alluvial fan flows (emanating from Devil Canyon and a small un-named canyon) to the north side of the site and into the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes. The runoff from the Middle North and South, and Rock Avalanche Canyons would be intercepted along the south edge of the planned development. A protected embankment and elevated fill would be used to convey flows easterly along the south boundary to Dike No. 4. The conceptual flood protection plan for the Travertine development shown in Exhibit 4.10-1 ensures that all residents of the community, as well as downstream facilities and properties, will be protected from the local hydrologic conditions. For example, Project improvements will serve to protect the adjacent CVWD recharge basins from offsite storm flows. These basins are currently exposed to stormwater discharges from existing canyons including Middle North and South, Rock Avalanche Canyons and portions of Devils Canyon. The Travertine Project Preliminary Hydrology Study and the Drainage Master Plan identify the size and location of on -site and off -site drainage facilities required to protect the proposed development from the 100-year storm event. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-6 October 2023 478 Guadalu'p-e Dike'* North Bank GuadalupeDike South Bank E �" .�_ A 10 _ A- -- Diversion Dike .A Crossing Crossing A ' Boundary r ,u L• West Edgy Protection k'� ReadfBradge .1, er r� r 1J ,•s� ' 3k _ — � l + r � III ,, ,�I, � i��4� Dike #4410 South Edge Source: Drainage Master Plan, Q3 I SA• ULTIN , INC. FLOOD PROTECTION PLAN -iul- EWA1dk,G!!dQ4 �:tiASLTRAVERTINE EXHIBITiTfb-1 -gy ht nW f��F —Up2m �}-- kslrlq "WK awl North Lpvm Iwrum �� ,me+lllt,erllrrrn S�oath LAyine Gaada Iupe Dike SECT ION A -A bmw CNLfrV�l � Wm Deiw srr_r WaslEdge SKTI-10% B-B mmpm"U �r*p Freeamrd YirflWWWWS -- .lbp �L'J02' NII'liliI: South Edge SBTION �-c Source: Drainage Master Plan, Q3 FAD MSA-CONSULTING, INC. FLOOD PROTECTION PLAN i5rl - [ddr;i, 1de, G!!dCj:wi55 L i'.lUjve;'Uq;i TRAVERTI N E EXHIBITi8PO-1 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Storm Event Criteria This analysis includes various references to the one -hundred -year (100-year) storm event, primarily when denoting the requirements and basis for sizing the project's storm drain design and stormwater retention capacity. Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) literature, the 100-year storm is a rainfall event, the intensity and duration of which has a reoccurrence interval (or probability of return) of 100 years, which is equivalent to a one -percent chance of being equaled or exceeded during any given year. The 100-year or 1-percent storm event determines the base flood conditions for purposes of FEMA flood zone designations, including those deemed to be at higher risk, like Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA). For hydrology purposes, the "controlling" 100-year storm event is one with the intensity and duration capable of generating the maximum stormwater volume. For purposes of analyzing the proposed Project, the 100-Year 24 Hour Storm was used to model project runoff. and serves as a basis for properly sizing the storm drain facilities, including inlets, pipes, outlets, and retention basins. As required by the City, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 14 (NOAA Atlas 14) was used as the basis for determining 100-year storm event rainfall quantities and durations. 4.10.3 Regulatory Setting As previously introduced, hydrology and stormwater management controls for land development activities are regulated under mandates at the federal, state, regional, and local level. The applicable requirements are aimed at preventing land development from causing impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of receiving streams, rivers, and water bodies. These regulations apply at different stages of development, including planning, design, construction and post -construction, such that physical land disturbance, vegetation clearing, earth movement, grading, construction activities, and facility operations would not be permitted to occur without demonstrating compliance with the local, regional, and state permitting regulations. Local hydrologic requirements are also manifested as City engineering standards, such as those found in Title 13 (Subdivision Regulations) in the La Quinta Municipal Code and Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems) discussed below. Federal Federal Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 was enacted to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by regulating the discharge of pollutants to waters of the U.S. from point sources. As part of the NPDES program, subsequent amendments to the CWA established a framework for regulating non -point source discharges from urban land runoff and other diffuse sources that were also found to contribute to runoff pollution. Under CWA, the Environmental Protection Agency Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-9 October 2023 481 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY (EPA) delegated the NPDES permit program to various state, tribal, and territorial governments, enabling them to perform many of the permitting, administrative, and enforcement aspects of the program. California is a delegated NPDES state and has authority to administer the NPDES program within its limits. The pertinent sections of the CWA regulatory structure are summarized below: Section 102 requires the planning agency of each state to prepare a basin plan to set forth regulatory requirements for protection of surface water quality, including designated beneficial uses for surface waterbodies, and specified water quality objectives to protect those uses. The applicable plan to the project area is the Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region, effective January 8, 2019. Section 303(d) requires each state to provide a list of impaired surface waters that do not meet or are expected not to meet state water quality standards as defined by that section. Section 402 requires that all point -source discharges, including but not limited to, construction -related runoff discharges to surface waters and some post -development dischargers, be regulated through the NPDES program. Project sponsors must obtain an NPDES permit from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). National Flood Insurance Program The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) serve as the basis for identifying potential hazards and determining the need for and availability of federal flood insurance. As mandated by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, FEMA administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide subsidized federal flood insurance to residents of communities where future floodplain development is regulated. FEMA has developed FIRMS to determine the need for and availability of federal flood insurance. FIRM maps rely on a variety of flood risk information based on historic, meteorological, hydrologic and hydraulic data, as well as existing development, open space and topographic conditions within an area. FEMA mapping also incorporates the results of engineering studies to delineate Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), which are considered at higher risk of inundation and flood -related hazards. State and Local Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code section 13000 et seq.) is the principal law governing water quality regulation for surface waters in California, thus effectuating the delegated provisions of the federal CWA and its NPDES program. It has set forth a comprehensive program to protect water quality and the beneficial uses applicable to surface waters, wetlands, and ground water and to point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The Porter -Cologne Act establishes that, as a matter of policy, all the waters of the State shall be protected; all activities and factors affecting the Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-10 October 2023 482 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY quality of water shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality within reason; and that the state must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of water in the state from degradation. To regulate and protect water quality pursuant to NPDES and to exercise rulemaking and regulatory activities, the Porter -Cologne Act established the SWRCB and nine California Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). In this context, the Project site and Coachella Valley are located within Region 7, Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board. Another mechanism of the Porter -Cologne Act is the requirement to adopt water quality control plans containing the guiding policies of water pollution management in the state. Under this framework, the Colorado River Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) serves as the applicable document prepared, adopted, and maintained to identify the existing and potential beneficial uses of waters of the State and establish water quality objectives to protect these uses. The Basin Plan is the guiding document that outlines the Colorado River Basin Water Board's plan for preserving and enhancing water quality in the region for the protection of beneficial uses for present and future generations. The Basin Plan contains the region's beneficial uses for groundwaters and surface waters, water quality objectives for protection of beneficial uses, and implementation programs to achieve water quality objectives. NPDES Stormwater General Permit for Construction Activities Under the federal CWA, discharges of stormwater from construction sites must comply with the conditions of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The SWRCB has adopted the Construction General Permit that applies to projects resulting in 1 or more acres of soil disturbance. These requirements occur under the state's most current Construction General Permit (CGP), Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ. Compliance with the CGP involves the development and implementation of a project -specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), designed to prevent potential adverse impacts to surface water quality, including erosion and siltation, during the period of construction. As applicable, the SWPPP is required to provide limits of temporary disturbance and will indicate the specific locations where storm water Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented. Storm water BMPs refer to a schedule of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent, eliminate, or reduce the pollution of receiving waters. BMPs are standardized in a handbook made available by the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA). Consistent with Section XIV of the CGP, the required SWPPP must also specify the necessary recordkeeping, relevant good site housekeeping requirements, proper waste management, proper handling and storage within the allowable construction limits. Also, as a requirement, the SWPPP must be prepared by a registered Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) and implemented by a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner to ensure that the proper expertise is applied toward these plans. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-11 October 2023 483 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Whitewater River Watershed Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System In 1987, Congress amended the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) to require public agencies which serve urbanized areas with a population greater than 100,000 to obtain permits to discharge urban stormwater runoff from municipally owned drainage facilities including streets, highways, storm drains and flood control channels. In November 1990, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) promulgated enforceable regulations establishing Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit requirements under its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. In California, USEPA has delegated its NPDES permitting authority to the California State Water Resources Control Board (CSWRCB), which issues and enforces NPDES MS4 Permits through its nine designated regions. As previously introduced, the Whitewater River Region MS4 Permit applies to an area of approximately 367 square miles, which generally corresponds to the urbanized portions of the watershed and Coachella Valley. The MS4 Permit compliance programs are administered by Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, (RCFC&WCD,) CVWD, and the incorporated Coachella Valley cities, including La Quinta. The objective of the MS4 regulations is in part to reduce potential pollutants in urban runoff from land development construction, municipal, commercial, and industrial areas to the maximum extent possible. Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act The Coachella Valley groundwater basin is the primary groundwater source for the project region, with CVWD being the domestic water purveyor serving the project site. Based on a 1964 estimate by DWR, the Coachella Valley groundwater basin has an approximate storage capacity of 39.2 million acre-feet (AF) of water within the upper 1,000 feet and is divided into four subbasins: Indio, Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, and San Gorgonio. The project site is specifically underlain by the Indio Subbasin, which is also known as the Whitewater River Subbasin. In 1964, DWR estimated that the Indio Subbasin contained approximately 29.8 million AF of water in the first 1,000 feet below the ground surface, or approximately 76 percent of the total groundwater in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. CVWD works with other local water agencies and Coachella Valley stakeholders to implement water conservation, water reuse, and groundwater recharge strategies to ensure water availability and system capacity to meet the needs of the Coachella Valley. In 2002, recognizing that continued overdraft was a threat to the economy and quality of life in the Coachella Valley, CVWD developed the 2002 Coachella Valley Groundwater Management Plan in collaboration with other local stakeholders. The 2002 plan focused on reducing overdraft, preventing groundwater level decline, protecting groundwater quality, and preventing land subsidence. In 2010, the 2010 Coachella Valley Groundwater Management Plan Update was prepared to document the accomplishments in reducing overdraft and address changed conditions since 2002. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-12 October 2023 484 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY In 2014, the California Legislature signed a three -bill legislative package into law, collectively known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). 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. Groundwater management is described as the planned and coordinated monitoring, operation, and administration of a groundwater basin's sustainability. 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. Basin prioritization is based on a variety of factors such as population, number of wells, and other information determined to be relevant by DWR. 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. DWR evaluates each GSP or Alternative Plan in how well it will achieve basin sustainability. The Indio Subbasin was designated as a medium -priority subbasin by DWR. CVWD, Coachella Water Authority (CWA), Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Indio Water Authority (IWA) collectively represent the Indio Subbasin GSAs. In January 2017, the GSAs submitted to DWR the 2010 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2010 CVWMP), accompanied by an Indio Subbasin Bridge Document, as a SGMA-compliant Alternative Plan. On July 17, 2019, DWR approved the Alternative Plan with a requirement to submit an Alternative Plan Update by January 1, 2022, and every five years thereafter. Based on the Indio Subbasin SGMA documentation, the combined strategies have resulted in significant groundwater storage increases across the subbasin, thus allowing the region to comply with the framework for sustainable management. CVWD collaborates with the operation and maintenance of three replenishment facilities serving the Indio Subbasin: Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility, the CVWD Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, and the Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility. Artificial replenishment, or recharge, is recognized by the water districts as one of the most effective methods available for preserving local groundwater supplies, reversing aquifer overdraft and meeting demand by domestic consumers. According to the CVWD web site on Groundwater Replenishment and Imported Water, local agencies have percolated over 650 billion gallons of water back into the aquifer to date. In the central part of the Coachella Valley, groundwater recharge is provided by the recently constructed first phase of the Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility, operated by CVWD. According to the CVWD web site, this facility is expected to add up to 25,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water annually into the aquifer. Combined with water conservation and efficiency requirements, individual development projects can contribute to groundwater sustainability by implementing the required stormwater runoff retention and infiltration facilities. 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-13 October 2023 485 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)/Stormwater Resource (SWR) Plan serves as a combined plan which addresses the requirements of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Proposition 1 2016 IRWM Grant Program Guidelines and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) 2015 Stormwater Resource Plan (SWRP) Guidelines. The plan is managed by five water purveyors and one wastewater agency of the Coachella Valley. The IRWM program is a local water resources management approach directed by California Department of Water Resources (DWR), aimed at securing long-term water supply reliability within California by first recognizing the inter -connectivity of water supplies, and then encouraging the development and implementation of projects that yield combined benefits for water supplies, water quality, and natural resources. The IRWM Plan and Stormwater Resource Plan (SWRP) have been combined into one document because of the regional approach, overlap of stakeholder interests and existing stakeholder network, and similar grants and project scoring processes for the two plans. SWRP development focuses on stormwater and dry weather runoff capture. Following the passage of Senate Bill (SB) 985, any stormwater or dry weather runoff capture project receiving funding from any bond approved after January 1, 2014, must be included in a SWRP. The intent of SB 985 is to encourage the use of stormwater and dry weather runoff as a resource to improve water quality, reduce localized flooding, and increase water supplies for beneficial uses and the environment. The SWRCB provides guidance for the development of SWRP's through the SWRCB 2015 SWRP Guidelines and manages the associated Stormwater Grant Program (SWGP). City of La Quinta Municipal Code Chapter 8.70 Surface Water Management and Discharge Controls The intent of this chapter is to protect public health, safety, and the environment through prohibiting non-stormwater discharges into the MS4, reducing pollutants in urban runoff, establishing minimum requirements for surface runoff management, and protecting and enhancing the quality of surface waters consistent with the federal Clean Water Act. This intent is achieved through the regulation of non-stormwater discharges to the municipal separate storm drain; control of the discharge to municipal separate storm drains from spills, dumping or disposal of materials other than stormwater; and reduction pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. Chapter 13.24.120 Drainage This section sets forth the design parameters for establishing stormwater management for subdivisions, noting that the hydrologic and hydraulic design of drainage facilities shall be based on the storm event having a frequency of occurrence once every 100 years, also referred to as the controlling 100-year storm event. The design of such facilities is subject to approval by the City engineer. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-14 October 2023 486 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems) The requirements for the project -specific hydrology design and reporting are represented in the City's Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems), with a revised effective date of October 5, 2020. This resource establishes storm drain design specifications and general guidelines to be followed by a California Registered Civil Engineer in this practice. Regarding drainage, this bulletin indicates the requirement to provide adequate retention capacity to intercept and percolate the entire 100-year storm event. Retention requirements are also established in Section 13.24.120 (Drainage) of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Bulletin #06-16 also asserts the requirement for a Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMPO to be implemented in accordance with the Whitewater River Watershed, Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. 2035 La Quinta General Plan The subject of Flooding and Hydrology forms part of Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards of the 2035 La Quinta General Plan. As part of the strategy to proactively plan for and protect development areas from significant flooding, the General Plan calls for the continued enforcement of requirements for on -site retention facilities. Specifically, Program FH-1.3.a calls for new development to construct on -site retention/detention facilities and other necessary stormwater management facilities that are capable of managing 100-year stormwater flows. In general, these provisions are consistent with the established mandates at the regional, state and federal level cited above. 4.10.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following standards and criteria have been drawn from Appendix G: Environmental Checklist Form of the CEQA Guidelines. Development of the Travertine Specific Plan site would have a significant effect on hydrology and water quality if it is determined that the project would: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site; Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-15 October 2023 487 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv. impede or redirect flood flows? d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Methodology As previously introduced, the relevant findings throughout this Hydrology and Water Quality section rely in part on three key technical studies: Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan (DMP), prepared by Q3 Consulting on June 10, 2021; Travertine Project Preliminary Hydrology Study, prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. in November of 2021 (Hydrology Study); and the Travertine Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. in September 2021. The DMP and the Hydrology Study identify the drainage design and infrastructure and flood protection devices that are needed to provide flood protection and adequate drainage onsite. The Hydrology Study and the WQMP also recommend water quality management infrastructure and practices. As discussed in the Project Description section of the DEIR, the recommendations of the DMP, the Hydrology Study and the WQMP have been incorporated into the Project design. The scope of the DMP, completed by March of 2023, was to provide a watershed assessment, including regional and local hydrology, flood hazard analysis, and hydraulics as a basis for identifying the grading, drainage and infrastructure recommendations for the proposed development. Specifically, the DMP identifies the flood protection for surrounding uses, on -site facilities, and CVWD facilities to establish consistency with the requirements and guidelines instituted by the City of La Quinta, CVWD, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Dike No. 4) in the event of a one percent annual chance 100-year storm and flood event. In establishing parameters for control and protection from the off -site drainage conditions, the DMP allowed for the development of a hydrology design under a separate plan that solely focused on the on -site conditions. The scope of the Preliminary Hydrology Study was to develop a preliminary internal drainage plan that would provide the project site with adequate drainage and flood protection from a 100-yr storm event without adversely impacting the adjacent properties and improvements. The Hydrology Study identifies the baseline drainage conditions and on -site watershed areas to determine the preliminary location and size of proposed drainage facilities, required to ensure post -development stormwater conditions are equivalent to predevelopment conditions. The recommended drainage design is sized for a peak flowrate from a one percent chance 100-year storm event, consistent with the Riverside County Flood Control District Hydrology Manual. The rainfall values used for the Hydrology Study were obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 14, which is appended to the Hydrology Study. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-16 October 2023 488 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Like the DMP, the Preliminary Hydrology Study considers project baseline conditions, including the existing local and regional flood protection infrastructure corresponding to off -site flows, but differs from the DMP by focusing on the on -site development conditions. The Project -specific WQMP complies with the most current standards of the Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit. It identifies a strategy of site design and source controls with a mandated operation and maintenance program to address post construction stormwater runoff quantity and quality requirements. In particular, the WQMP provides that the Project has been designed to contain and infiltrate runoff through the on -site drainage and flood management facilities described below and through use of landscaping and irrigation system design, and protected slopes and channels. In addition, the WQMP provides that water quality will be maintained through non-structural best management practices, including education for property owner, operators, tenants, occupants, and employees, activity restrictions, irrigation system and landscape maintenance, common area litter control, street sweeping of private streets, and drainage facility inspection and maintenance. The WQMP assumes the drainage conditions identified in the Hydrology Study and provides recommendations consistent with those assumptions to ensure compliance with the MS4 Permit. The WQMP is intended to inform the terms of the Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Agreement that will be entered into by the developer and the City to mandate the proper maintenance and operation of the Project's stormwater facilities, which agreement will also allow City entry for inspection and enforcement. Proposed Storm water Infrastructure Off -Site Drainage and Flood Management Facilities Consistent with the recommendations of the DMP, the Project proposes stormwater management infrastructure to provide regional flood protection through perimeter embankments and drainage swales along the western and southern boundaries of the Specific Plan development area and improvements to the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes located to the north of the Project site. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.10-1, the proposed perimeter embankments would consist of grade differentials and swales along the Project's western boundary (west edge protection) to reorient the off -site unconfined alluvial flows from Devil Canyon and Middle Canyon Area that currently flow easterly across the Project site around the development and toward the north side of the Project site and into the existing Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes. The configuration/routing of the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dike system will be maintained. Proposed improvements are meant to fortify the existing system to handle increased flows associated with the diverted flows that currently transverse the Project site. The off -site runoff from the Middle North and South, and Rock Avalanche Canyons would be intercepted along the southern development boundary by a perimeter embankment that will convey flows easterly along the southern development boundary to Dike No. 4 to ultimately meet at the existing impoundment area On -Site Drainage and Flood Management Facilities Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-17 October 2023 489 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The Hydrology Report recommends a system of underground storm drains and catch basins to intercept, convey, and infiltrate stormwater runoff within the Project site to ensure equivalence between pre- and post- development conditions. Specifically, stormwater will be conveyed down the Project site gradient and into two primary surface basins (Basin A and Basin B) located at the east -end of the Project site. As is discussed in the Hydrology Report, the on -site storm flow volume difference between the pre- and post- development conditions (32.6 ac-ft) will be retained and infiltrated in the two basins that occupy a combined area of approximately 26.7 acres. As is shown in the Hydrology Report, the basins are sized and located in such a manners so as to ensure that the stormwater flow rates and volumes resulting from the developed condition are equal to or less than the pre -development condition, therefore preventing hydromodifications, such as increases in the total stormwater volume, runoff velocity, or peak discharge outside the Project site. Through the on -site detention and infiltration function, these basins and associated infrastructure would be subject to the City's hydrologic requirements as set forth in Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems) and water quality (MS4) requirements. Engineering Bulletin #06-16 includes detailed criteria commensurate with final engineering design to which storm drain systems are held prior to final approval by the City's Public Works Department. The WQMP identifies the structural (retention basins) and non-structural controls and best management practices with a draft Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan that will be implemented during the life of the Project to protect water quality. This is achieved through a required Agreement completed in the Final WQMP and recorded against the property to ensure site maintenance and periodic City inspection of the private storm drain facilities. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-18 October 2023 490 mpl- % f.1 LILL% ; . ..I KC, . A:;I IN 1: hL L I r i kL I - I . 1 %xL M le H %W1 4 L / "% ell % -7 N r L% 31 %16 Source: Drainage Master Plan, Q3 MSA-CONSULTING. INC. PROPOSED ONSITE HYDROLOGY CONDITIONS TRAVERTINE EXHIBITV10-2 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality Construction Phase Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan During the period of construction, compliance with waste discharge requirements will be achieved through the permit registration and coverage process under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ. This permit is otherwise known as the Construction General Permit (CGP), applicable to any construction or demolition, including, but not limited to, clearing, grading, grubbing, or excavation, or any other activity that results in a land disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre. The proposed project's extent of land disturbance is greater than one acre and therefore triggers the CGP coverage requirement and the associated plan implementation process. Failure to obtain coverage under the CGP would be a violation of the CWA and the California Water Code. Therefore, the project's permit registration process, associated plans, and measures are not considered mitigation. The proposed clearing, grading, and construction activities have the potential to result in temporary surface impacts primarily from erosion, sedimentation, and management of construction -related materials. Compliance with the CGP requires the development and implementation of a project specific SWPPP, to prevent potential adverse impacts to surface water quality during the entire period of construction and for all disturbed land surface areas, including those associated site preparation, mobilization, grading, and vertical construction activities through completion and final stabilization. CGP coverage and compliance may occur under one permit or under multiple permits depending on the scope and timing of construction -related activities, but must account for all forms of land disturbance. The SWPPP is required to identify a strategy of storm water Best Management Practices (BMPs) in accordance with Section XIV (SWPPP Requirements) of the CGP. Storm water BMPs refer to a schedule of activities, prohibitions, practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent, eliminate, or reduce the pollution of the receiving waters, primarily focused on preventing erosion, siltation, illicit discharge, and contamination to downstream facilities, such as those operated by CVWD. In the case of the proposed project, BMPs will be established in the SWPPP, and consistent with the WQMP include such measures as storm drain inlet protection, erosion control, perimeter and onsite runoff control including linear sediment barriers, proper waste management, and proper material storage. The SWPPP must be prepared concurrently with final engineering design as a requirement of the City's grading permit checklist. In this context, BMPs are standard requirements established by the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), rather than mitigation. Due to the amount of construction logistics information, final engineering design, and contractor's input, a SWPPP is prepared concurrently with final engineering design as a requirement of a grading permit. Compliance with the State's CGP during construction is regulated and enforced as part of the Colorado River Regional Water Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-20 October 2023 492 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Quality Control Board (RWQCB Region 7) inspection and audit authority indicated in Section 13267 of the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The City of La Quinta will also provide enforcement oversight through its MS4 implementation and in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code, Section 8.70.020. During all stages of construction, the project will also be required to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) Rule 403 and 403.1 and the City's Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance. Implementation of Fugitive Dust Control Plans primarily pertains to air quality, but also supports water quality protection through the requirement of soil stabilization practices aimed at preventing sediment erosion and track -out by implementing such measures as stabilized construction entrances/exit points equipped with gravel pads and track -out plates and the corresponding daily maintenance. Soil stabilization is achieved through temporary watering or an environmentally friendly (EPA approved) soil binding agent treatment of disturbed areas that become disturbed during construction. The enforcement of dust control plan implementation, including verification that the field actions are consistent with the City -approved plans, is performed by South Coast AQMD and by the City of La Quinta. The concurrent implementation of the required SWPPP and Dust Control Plan plans will establish measures to prevent the potential construction -related impacts to surface water quality, including instances of erosion and siltation, at the site and its surroundings. Therefore, during the period of construction, less than significant impacts are anticipated pertaining to violations of any water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or degradation of surface or ground water quality. Post -Construction Water Quality Management Plan The project site is unique because it is located upstream behind CVWD dike #4 Groundwater Recharge Facility. Therefore, the design intent of the on -site storm drain design has been to provide adequate detention and infiltration capacity to protect downstream conditions, including the offsite discharge of contaminants, erosion, and siltation as it relates to water quality. One hundred percent of the pre- and post -development drainages are contained behind the dike where they are retained and infiltrated. The two proposed infiltration basins within the project site are water quality basins designed to capture and infiltrate the 2-yr. storm event. Additionally, the 100 year 24-hr runoff volume delta between the existing and proposed condition will infiltrate through the proposed basins. Peak flows will be allowed to outlet at or below existing condition peak flows. Emergency overflow spillways have been designed at the east edges of the basins to route flows in a controlled condition to the area behind Dike #4 as in the existing condition. Project stormwater management measures will be implemented throughout construction and operations to protect the existing CVWD recharge basins. Onsite stormwater collection facilities and perimeter controls for all Project activities will be reviewed and approved by the City. During the life of the project, water quality standards and waste discharge requirements will be met and demonstrated through the compliance of the NPDES permit program for post -construction conditions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-21 October 2023 493 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY In accordance with the Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) within the Whitewater River Watershed (Order No. R7-2013-0011), the proposed project, as a priority development project, is required to develop and implement a project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to comply with the most current standards of the Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, both of which are programs under the NPDES and CWA framework. The WQMP requirement is also stated in City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Section 8.70.070, which indicates that no proponent of a priority development project shall commence any land disturbing activities in connection with such proposed project without first submitting and obtaining the City's approval of a WQMP for such project. The Travertine Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), dated September 2021, has been prepared for this project by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. The project specific WQMP addresses post construction stormwater runoff quantity and quality requirements by relying on the proposed storm drain and infiltration facilities with a mandated operation and maintenance program to meet the Low Impact Development (LID) Site Design 100 percent measurable goal criteria. This WQMP strategy centers around the use of two retention basins (Basin A and B) as the primary method of LID and MS4 compliance. As currently configured, Basin A occupies approximately 6.7 acres and Basin B covers approximately 20.0 acres, proportional to the respective on -site tributary area. The overall maintenance of the private storm drain system will be covered by a final WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) agreement. The Preliminary WQMP O&M covers implementation, inspection, maintenance and frequency guidelines for education for property owners, tenants and occupants; activity restrictions; common area landscape management and efficient landscape design; common area litter control; contractor/employee training; common area catch basin inspection; street sweeping of private streets and parking lots; storm drain system stenciling and signage; trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollutant introduction. According to the Preliminary Hydrology Study, each retention facility is sized to contain the incremental increase (delta) in stormwater volume and flow rate between the pre -development and post - development condition for the 100-year, 24-hour storm, such that project implementation does not incur an increase in those hydrology parameters. The combined volume capacity of the basins is 32.6 acre-feet over a combined area of approximately 26.7 acres, a quantity which will be retained and infiltrated at those locations. Peak flows will be allowed to outlet at or below existing condition behind Dike #4 via a proposed 66-inch diameter pipe. The use of stormwater retention facilities in conformance with the local retention requirements is considered categorically by the MS4 guidance to meet 100 percent of the LID and Site Design measurable requirements. Concurrent with the hydrology report, grading, and engineering improvement plans, the WQMP will be subject to review and approval by the City engineer prior to the issuance of a grading permit. During the life of the project, this plan is implemented through a site -specific Stormwater Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-22 October 2023 494 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Management/BMP Facilities Agreement, which mandates the proper maintenance and operations of the project's stormwater facilities and allows for City entry for inspection and enforcement. The existing Dike No. 4 ultimately prevents offsite flows from entering the public storm drain system or the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel to the east of the project and Dike. The proposed site plan and physical improvements will prevent the discharge of point source or diffused sources of pollution from the project property. Therefore, surface water quality impairments will be prevented. In summary, during construction and operation (life of the project), implementation of the proposed development will be required to comply with CWA, NPDES, state, and local regulations to prevent violations or impacts to surface water quality standards and waste discharge requirements pertinent to surface or ground water quality. The project does not seek any permitting actions that would vary from the established requirements. Impacts are less than significant. b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. The Project will rely on groundwater resources as a source of domestic and construction water supplies. As discussed above, the Project also has the project has the potential to alter existing drainage and infiltration and groundwater quality. Accordingly, the impact analysis addresses Project impacts on groundwater supply, recharge and groundwater management. Groundwater Supply A Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) for Travertine Specific Plan was prepared for and approved by CVWD on June 16, 2021, with an approved revision on March 13, 2018 that is valid through June 24, 2026. The purpose of the WSA/WSV was to document the sufficiency of the local water supply to meet the demand of development that could occur under the proposed project. This WSA/WSV provides an assessment and verification of the availability of sufficient water supplies during normal, single -dry, and multiple -dry years over a 20-year projection to meet the projected demands of the Project, in addition to existing and planned future water demands of CVWD, as required by Senate Bill 610 (SB 610), SB 221, and SB 1262. This WSA/WSV also includes identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, or agreements relevant to the identified water supply for the project and quantities of water received in prior years pursuant to those entitlements, rights, contracts, and agreements. The Water Supply Assessment/Verification for the Travertine Specific Plan Project (WSA/WSV) has been prepared to address the projected water demand and supply conditions associated with full buildout of the proposed project. As a standard requirement, the WSA/WSV provided an assessment of the project's anticipated water demand and verification of the availability of sufficient water supplies during normal, single -dry, and multiple -dry years over a 20-year projection, considering the existing and planned future Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-23 October 2023 495 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY demands of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The CVWD Board of Directors approved the project's WSA/WSV on November 22, 2006 and an update on March 13, 2018 (2018 WSA/WSV). On June 16, 2021, the proponent submitted information to CVWD with the amendment to the project and the associated water demand estimates. CVWD reviewed the 2018 WSA/WSV and the updated water demand estimates and determined that an update of the approved WSA/WSV was not required and extended the 2018 WSA/WSV validity through June 24, 2026. The 2018 WSA/WSV estimated a total project water demand of 1,225.13 acre-feet per year (AFY). The updated project information submitted to CVWD on June 16, 2021 estimated an amended water demand of 867.47 AFY. For purposes of EIR analysis, the calculated Project water demand is cited herein and throughout as 867.47 acre-feet. A complete analysis of the project's domestic water impacts is provided in the Utilities and Service Systems section of this document. Based on the information, analysis, and findings documented in the WSA/WSV with approval by CVWD, substantial evidence was produced to support a determination 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 State Water Project and Colorado River contract supplies, water rights and other water supply contracts, and CVWD's commitment to eliminate overdraft and reduce per capita water use in CVWD's service area. CVWD has committed sufficient resources to further implement utilization of imported water supplies, purchase of additional water supplies, water conservation, and source substitution. For analysis purposes, the proposed project is consistent with the primary option (Plan A) of the adopted WSA as a residential community of up to 1,200 units with resort uses. Specifically, the Project under the Plan A Option would use approximately 1,255.13 acre-feet per year (AFY) or, 1.43 acre-feet (AF) per acre. Plan A water demand represents approximately 1.09 percent of the total water supply number (114,600 AFY) for 2020, and approximately 0.64 percent of the total water supply number (194,300 AFY) for 2035. The water supply number represents the amount of water resources estimated for those years, based on CVWD's water planning assumptions. For reference, the secondary option (Plan B) analyzed in the WSA is residential -only gated community and is not relevant to the current proposed project or analysis. It is anticipated that the Project will incorporate elements of CVWD's water conservation plan as required by SBx7-7. These include conservation elements for indoor and outdoor use for single- family residential, mixed -use composed of commercial with residential land uses, and community and neighborhood park uses. This may further reduce the ultimate Project demands. Therefore, the result of the water demand and verification analysis undertaken to obtain the initial and updated WSA approval by CVWD support less than significant impacts by the proposed project pertaining to groundwater supplies. Groundwater Quality Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-24 October 2023 496 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Stormwater flows and resultant surface water are infiltrated through an existing system of subsurface soils and rock formations to regional groundwater basins. Existing natural groundwater treatment (infiltration) will be protected from urban runoff created by the proposed Project through pretreatment of surface runoff to remove contaminants prior to discharge to groundwater. Pretreatment includes implementing project BMPs for the removal of sediments and other prohibited contaminants from surface water that have the potential to impact groundwater quality. The project includes a storm drain system allowing project runoff to be intercepted and conveyed along engineered storm drain lines toward a system of on -site detention and retention basins, sized to meet the City's hydrologic requirements and water quality objectives under a required WQMP. The storm drain and basin system will be privately operated, monitored and maintained during the life of the project per a required WQMP agreement to be entered between the project proponent and the City. In doing so, the project's on -site infrastructure will be managed in perpetuity to prevent the discharge of untreated runoff. The proposed storm drain and retention infrastructure will be consistent with Chapter 13.24.120 (Drainage) of the La Quinta Municipal Code and with the City's Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems), requiring on -site retention/detention basins and other necessary stormwater management facilities that are capable of managing the 100-year stormwater flows. The WQMP includes non-structural and structural source controls to prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system and impacting groundwater. Non-structural source control measures consist of site operations, activities, and/or programs described in the WQMP and implemented by the project operator to educate site managers, employees, and residents to prevent potential pollutants from being produced, coming into contact with the storm drain system, and impacting groundwater. The required non-structural source control measures are as follows: 1) Education and training for property owners, operators, or employees to understand the importance of pollution prevention. This measure is typically fulfilled in the WQMP by referencing the educational resources from the Riverside County Watershed Protection partnership program. 2) Activity restrictions, such as prohibiting littering, debris discharge into storm drain inlets, and any form of pollution. 3) Irrigation system and landscape maintenance to upkeep the system effectiveness and minimize the amount of irrigation -related runoff. 4) Common area litter control to prevent trash accumulation or improper disposal that could impair the on -site storm drain system. 5) Street sweeping private streets and parking lots on a routine basis to properly collect dust and debris from the privately operated paved areas. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-25 October 2023 497 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 6) Drainage facility inspection and maintenance to ensure the proper operation of the storm drain system, including privately operated inlets, lines, outlets, and basin facilities. Structural source control measures consist of facility design standards to prevent direct contact between potential pollutants and stormwater runoff. The required structural source control measures are as follows: 1) Storm drain inlet stenciling and signage at each storm drain inlet with a brief statement prohibiting dumping of improper non-stormwater materials into the storm drain system. 2) Landscape and irrigation system design involving water efficient fixtures and associated maintenance to prevent nuisance runoff. 3) Retention basin slope protection via routine inspection and maintenance of the facility groundcover. 4) Properly maintained trash enclosures and bins to prevent improper handling and disposal in common areas. The required non-structural and structural source control measures, including associated maintenance, will be applicable during the life of the project. The Project is therefore not expected to violate or interfere with the groundwater quality. Regarding ground water quality, less than significant impacts are anticipated. Groundwater Recharge As previously introduced, the project site is located west of the CVWD Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility and the US Bureau of Reclamation Dike No. 4. Based on the CVWD web site, the Groundwater Replenishment Facility was completed in 2009. This recharge facility is hydrologically separated with berms and grade separations from stormwater surface drainage patterns conveyed to Dike No. 4. The recharge facility percolates piped imported Colorado River water (and minimal direct rainfall) into the Indio/Whitewater Subbasin of the Coachella Valley aquifer. This facility replenishes an estimated 40,000 acre-feet of water annually into the aquifer. This amount of water is approximately what is used each year by 40,000 households. It is also estimated that in 30 years, the groundwater level in the deep aquifer in the eastern Coachella Valley will be 25 to 105 feet higher than it would have been had CVWD not built this facility. This system is hydrologically separated from stormwater surface drainage patterns conveyed to the retention system for Dike No. 4. The groundwater replenishment facilities are protected by a system of earthen berms, dikes, and concrete channels designed to convey drainage along the westerly and southerly facility limits toward Dike No. 4. As such, these flood control facilities establish a physical separation between the recharge ponds and the dike's retention areas. Replenishment facilities require protection from surface runoff that carries sediment and other debris that would impact the infiltration capabilities and efficiencies established by the design (including the slope and bed surfaces) of the basins. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-26 October 2023 498 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The proposed development will establish new flood protection embankments along the west and south project limits to convey off -site runoff in a similar pattern and direction as the existing improvements established to protect the recharge facilities. Off -site runoff will be conveyed northerly and easterly toward Dike No. 4. Meanwhile, on -site project runoff will be conveyed via storm drain lines to the on - site detention/retention basins. As a result of these infrastructure improvements designed to handle surface runoff and protect on- and off -site conditions, the project is not expected to result in a reduction or interference with the existing replenishment operations. Less than significant impacts are anticipated pertaining to interference with groundwater recharge. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: ci. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site The project setting and its surroundings have been modified by various existing flood control systems to address the offsite alluvial drainages that may affect the site. These include the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dike that separates the Coral Canyon development site to the north and the subject property. Dike No. 4 provides flood protection for agricultural and urbanizing lands to the east. Two separate systems of earthen barriers currently direct off -site flows from impacting the onsite agricultural land and the offsite Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, respectively. For the agricultural land, the earthen flood protection is established along the western and southern boundaries to divert and convey off -site flows easterly along the unimproved alignment of Avenue 62 and northerly along the unimproved alignment of Jefferson Street toward Dike No. 4. For the CVWD Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, the flood control improvements are designed to establish a hydrologic separation between surface runoff and the recharge ponds that receive piped inflow. This is similarly achieved by earthen berms, dikes, and concrete channels also designed to convey off -site runoff in a northerly and easterly direction toward the receiving Dike No. 4 flood control facilities. Based on the project -specific Drainage Master Plan, the proposed development will follow a similar yet fortified approach to the existing facilities by establishing flood control improvements and additional protection along the western and southern Project edges to continue conveying the off -site drainage northerly toward the Guadalupe system and easterly toward Dike No. 4. The destination of the existing off -site flows would remain unchanged, being the Dike No. 4 impound. Both the Project and the adjacent downstream recharge basins will be protected from westerly alluvial discharge and bulking by these enhanced improvements. The diversion of off -site flows would result in potentially significant off -site siltation and erosion impacts at the western embankment. Mitigation measure HWQ-1 includes provisions to monitor and remove sediment along the west bank to maintain pre -project conditions and will reduce off -site siltation and erosion impacts to below a level of significance. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-27 October 2023 499 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Within the Project, runoff from impervious surfaces, such as structures, hardscape, and roads will be conveyed to a private storm drain system connected to two on -site basins sized to infiltrate the incremental increase in stormwater volume resulting from the controlling 100-year storm event while also preventing an increase in flow rate compared to the pre -development condition. Only stormwater in excess of the on -site retention basin capacity would be conveyed into a designated emergency spillway location respective to each basin. As an engineered drainage facility, the spillway facility would be a stabilized surface conveyance and designed to control outflows while maintaining the flow depth and freeboard conditions. Therefore, within the hydrologic sizing parameters and engineering controls, the project would not modify any aspects of the existing replenishment facilities located down gradient. Proposed On -Site Controls Within the development area, the proposed land uses will result in an increase in impervious land cover through the introduction of structures, hardscape and streets. Absent of engineering controls, such land use changes would traditionally result in an increase in total stormwater runoff volume, an increase in runoff velocity, and a greater peak discharge. However, as is required through the City's engineering standards for land subdivision and development, and as identified in the Preliminary Hydrology Study, the project will incorporate on -site infrastructure to properly intercept, convey, and detain stormwater runoff resulting from the project development. On -Site Stormwater Facilities As proposed, the overall on -site grading and drainage pattern of the project will continue to emulate existing topography. Project stormwater runoff will be intercepted at and carried along the private street curb and gutter conveyances to multiple catch basins connected to a network of storm drain lines sized to confluence and outlet into the respective detention/infiltration basin (A and B). The outlet points in the basins will include rip -rap treatment as a form of energy dissipation to slow flows and reduce erosion to facilities. By conveying project runoff along engineered flow lines (pipes, surface swales, curb and gutter), instances of substantial erosion or siltation will be prevented as an inherent function of the private storm drain facilities. The on -site pervious areas of the project, which include open space and common areas, will be stabilized in accordance with approved landscaping plans. All on -site impervious and pervious land cover resulting from project implementation, including the storm drain system and surface basins, will be subject to proper operation and maintenance during the life of the project, as mandated by the governing covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and by the WQMP agreement that will be required of this project prior to issuance of a grading permit. Therefore, onsite project improvements are expected to prevent conditions of substantial on -site erosion or siltation. Proposed Off -Site Controls To address off -site drainage conditions that interface with and currently pass through the Project site, the proposed improvements include a series of engineered and fortified embankments and channels. The Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-28 October 2023 500 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY design of this system is identified in detail as a flood protection system in the DMP, which calls for flood control barriers to direct off -site ephemeral drainage in a northerly and easterly direction respectively as it interfaces with the western and southern edges of the project. The summary of impacts and controls from the Drainage Master Plan are provided below: Existing Dike No. 4: The proposed Project will have little to no impact on the runoff volumes generated from the total watershed tributary to the Dike No. 4. The net bulked volume for the controlling 100-year storm event is effectively equal in the existing and Project conditions. As proposed, on -site runoff will be impounded on site, pretreated to remove sediment, and percolated into the ground. There will be a controlled discharge of some pretreated stormflows as approved by CVWD. The increase in clear -water runoff volume associated with the site development is effectively neutralized by the resultant reduction in sediment yield associated with the development. The project will include the extension of Avenue 62 and Madison Street (as EVA access, as well as service and emergency access, only) over Dike No. 4, and a minor re -direction of flow from the unnamed canyon to the Guadalupe Dikes. These project elements will have a minor impact on the maximum flood stage profile (volume of impounded storm runoff) along Dike No. 4. During the 24-hour, 100-year storm event, the maximum water surface depth increases from 15.18 to 15.53 feet, resulting in a minimum freeboard of 11.75 feet (between the projected waterline and top of Dike No. 4). The increased depth for the "controlling" 100-year storm event will result in an excess of freeboard when compared to the current requirement which is 4-feet. Relative to the "standard" project flood, increased depth results in a minimum freeboard of 3.15 feet, which far exceeds the prior one -foot criteria adopted by CVWD. In this context, the term "exceedance" pertains to freeboard capacity, rather than an exceedance of capacity. The structural integrity and functionality of Dike No. 4 (relative to protecting downstream properties from storm flows, erosion and siltation) is maintained by design measures that ensure appropriate freeboard. Existing Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes: The existing Guadalupe dikes were constructed in 1968. No documentation for the design was available; however, it is reasonable to assume that the facility was designed to handle the total flow from the Devil Canyon watershed calculated at that time. Proposed conditions upstream of the Jefferson Street Road channel crossing are expected to reflect similar flow depths and velocities along the northern dike as existing. Conditions are expected to be similar for both the existing and proposed project conditions north of the Guadalupe Dike north bank. The construction of the proposed project will result in additional flow, approximately 5 percent, from the unnamed canyon being diverted to the Guadalupe dikes. The impacts to the dike from increased storm flows are generally located south of the north bank of the proposed Jefferson Road crossing, where the flow diversion occurs. The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes downstream of the diversion are proposed to be improved as a part of the project to convey the new flow rates with the freeboard and scour protection as required by CVWD, and in accordance with Federal standards for levee certification. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-29 October 2023 501 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The north and south Guadalupe Creek Diversion dikes shall be designed to meet FEMA requirements as stipulated in Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 65.10 (44CFR65.10) and all current engineering manuals and engineering technical letters of the USACE related to levee design and construction that are referred to in the Federal Code. Proposed West and South Bank Protection: The west and south banks are subject to active and inactive alluvial fan flows that will be reoriented according to the DMP analysis. The maximum flood depths and velocities to potentially interface with the proposed west and south embankments were calculated in the DMP based on the worst -case 1-percent (100-year) annual chance flood condition. The embankments could interface with potential depths of 12 to 15 feet and velocities of 15 feet per second at the higher ranges. The dynamics of this flow diversion will protect the proposed on -site development, but may also result in off -site material deposition from the erosion and siltation process which is assumed to be potentially significant. Therefore, the final design of these facilities will incorporate scour analysis to establish the appropriate toe -down protection. Accordingly, the proposed flood protection banks will take into account the natural erosion and deposition process inherent to the alluvial fan activity. The South Bank is subject to flows from the Middle Canyons and Rock Avalanche Canyon. The bank is proposed to be roughly parallel to the direction of flow and will be designed as a standard channel bank. The top of bank will provide a minimum of 3 feet of freeboard above the controlling 100-year storm event. Proposed Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 Bridge Crossings: The Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 roadway extensions into the project site will require crossings of the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes and Dike No. 4. The bridge configuration and sizing shall be determined during the final design and incorporated into the hydraulic models. The final design shall address freeboard and scour calculations to ascertain the proper engineering controls. During the life of the project, the proposed flood control infrastructure will be subject to the operation and maintenance actions stipulated in Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 to ensure that the required conveyance and freeboard conditions are held to design standard. Phase 1 Improvements: The Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan identified regional flood protection improvements based on the full build -out of the project. Phased development will require some level of interim flood protection improvements based on the location and extent of the improvements. The anticipated first phase of development is proposed to be located on the south side of the development site and include the Avenue 62 crossing of Dike No. 4. As such the south edge protection and the Avenue 62 culverts as shown on the Flood Protection Plan will be required to provide flood protection and conveyance that protects onsite and offsite areas from erosion and sedimentation. In addition, interim bank protection will be required along the western and northern edges of the phased development due to potential flow path uncertainty and high flow velocities associated with runoff from the Devils Canyon and Middle Canyon drainage areas. Rock riprap is proposed to be placed along these western and northern banks to provide the required protection. Riprap allows the water to slow and Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-30 October 2023 502 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY sediments to drop out of runoff. The size of the riprap should be based on the flood depths and flow velocities in the surrounding areas. Native rock should be selectively stockpiled during the grading operations and used for the riprap protection. Various rock sizes should be combined to comply with standard riprap gradations based on the size of the riprap needed. Ownership and maintenance of the levees is a CVWD responsibility. The engineer shall consult and as necessary secure approvals from CVWD, BLM, BOR and any other responsible agency prior to preparation of the final design and technical studies. Maintenance of the proposed embankment along the Projects western boundary will be the responsibility of the project proponent. This will include removal of accumulated sediment and debris associated with large storm events. In summary, the proposed project and associated flood control improvements will result in a potential redirection of the off -site flow path, resulting in foreseeable sediment deposition along the west bank of the project site. Therefore, off -site siltation impacts are potentially significant and Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 would be implemented to monitor and maintain the west bank to the required conveyance and freeboard conditions. With the proposed flood control improvements, design sequence in the Project Design Features, and Mitigation Measure HWQ-1, designed to account for runoff conveyance around the project while taking into consideration the natural erosion and deposition process associated with the active alluvial fan, less than significant impacts are expected pertaining to substantial erosion or siltation, on- or off -site. cii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site; On -Site Controls The proposed land uses will result in an increase in impervious land cover through the introduction of structures, hardscape and streets. The Project will incorporate private on -site infrastructure that will serve all developed portions of the subject property to intercept, convey, and detain stormwater runoff resulting from the project development and under the conditions of the design or controlling storm (24- hour, 100-year). In -street catch basins and other inlet points will capture street and area runoff in pipes that outlet to two on -site detention basins to be located on the eastern, low -elevation portion of the development area and in proximity of the Dike 4 impound area. Retention basins will be sized to handle the incremental increase in runoff volume and flow rate resulting in 100-year design storm event. The on - site storm drain system will be private and require proper operation and maintenance during the life of the project, as mandated by the governing covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and by the WQMP agreement that will be required of this project prior to issuance of a grading permit. As a result of the on - site storm drain infrastructure, the project will not result in an increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in on -site flooding. Off -Site Controls Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-31 October 2023 503 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The Drainage Master Plan prepared for the Project performed the hydrologic analysis necessary to determine the engineering controls to address the naturally occurring off -site alluvial fan drainage interfacing with the project. The proposed concept would primarily establish bank protection along the western and southern project edges to direct flows toward the receiving Dike No. 4 facilities. The Drainage Master Plan found that the infrastructure improvements would result in minimal changes ("little to no impact") on the offsite volumes being conveyed along the banks toward the receiving system. Instead, the system would simply redirect the flows in a similar manner that the existing berms have been established to protect the agricultural fields or off -site groundwater replenishment facilities. As a result, the off -site improvements would not result in an increase in the surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. Phase 1 Improvements: As mentioned previously, the anticipated first phase of development is proposed to be located on the south side of the development site and include the Avenue 62 crossing of Dike No. 4. South edge protection and the Avenue 62 culverts as shown on the Flood Protection Plan will be required to provide flood protection and conveyance. Interim bank protection will be required along the western and northern edges of the phased development due to potential flow path uncertainty and high flow velocities associated with runoff from the Devils Canyon and Middle Canyon drainage areas. Rock riprap is proposed to be placed along these western and northern banks to provide the required protection. ciii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or The Whitewater River MS4 guidance documentation has categorized the potential pollutants generated by various land uses, including residential, commercial, and parking lots, among others. The general categories associated with urban runoff from the land uses relevant to the project are sediment and turbidity; nutrients; toxic organic compounds; trash and debris; bacteria and viruses; and oil and grease. The objective of the project's WQMP is in part to demonstrate how the potential runoff pollutant categories are addressed via source control and low impact development measures to prevent the runoff discharge in a condition that would result in changes to the downstream hydrologic regime or add to the pollutant impairments. This objective is also achieved through relying on the proposed on -site retention facilities, which will contain project runoff up to the design capacity, instead of resulting in direct release into surrounding areas. Therefore, with the hydrologic retention controls, the project would not involve a direct release of runoff or associated pollution contribution that would need to be accepted and handled by public stormwater drainage systems. As previously introduced and discussed, runoff from the incremental increases in runoff resulting from the conversion of undeveloped (pervious) to developed (impervious) land cover, will be intercepted, conveyed, and retained/detained on -site in accordance with the City's engineering requirements and Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-32 October 2023 504 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY following the City approval of the final engineering plans (grading, hydrology, street, storm drain, utilities). CVWD is responsible for the review and approval of offsite improvements. The on -site retention will result in minimal pretreated discharge as approved by CVWD and contribution of runoff quantities above those observed from the undeveloped setting will be minimal. The capture and retention of urban runoff, in accordance with the WQMP site design and source control measures, will prevent a contribution of additional sources of pollution. As discussed previously, relative to groundwater quality and stormwater debris loads, the proposed development will incorporate on -site storm drain system improvements designed to capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff through retention facilities corresponding to each of the two on -site drainage management areas. Approved release of limited flows offsite will be pretreated by drainage system BMPs. Off -site ephemeral flows will be conveyed around the project area toward the existing Dike No. 4 impound without incurring any substantial increases in volumes or other hydrologic modifications capable of impairing the existing levee infrastructure. Pertaining to runoff pollution, the on -site storm drain system's detention system will capture project area runoff in accordance with the Project specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), preventing uncontrolled release into any public MS4 facilities. Dike No. 4 will continue to protect properties to the east of the levee from impacts associated with water quality and quantity impacts. Therefore, the project will not result in stormwater runoff conditions which would burden the City's existing MS4 capacity, create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. civ. Impede or redirect flood flows? Project implementation would involve flood protection facilities designed to convey or redirect alluvial fan drainage around the project to the existing receiving facilities, being the Guadalupe dikes to the north and Dike No. 4 to the east. The conceptual design of this infrastructure is the result of the detailed hydrologic analysis performed as part of the Drainage Master Plan. The project would contribute to the necessary improvements of CVWD facilities. As described previously, offsite alluvial flows from the west will be intercepted by the proposed embankment at the Project's western boundary. After reaching the embankment, flows will be directed either north or east around the Project. Approved upgrades to the existing Guadalupe dike system will largely maintain the existing route and configuration, while improving the structural protections for the Project and offsite areas. Storm flows will ultimately terminate at their existing location, impounded near Dike #4. The proposed facilities would not impede or hinder flood flows, but rather redirect them in an engineered manner as previously discussed in this section. As a result, less than significant impacts are anticipated. The matter of off -site siltation impacts due to the redirection of off -site flows is potentially significant and covered under its respective discussion and finding. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-33 October 2023 505 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The proposed west and south banks will be subject to active and inactive alluvial fan flows. The volume and peak flow rates tributary to these boundaries have been determined as a part of the hydrology and hydraulic analysis as provided in the DMP. With the proposed flood control infrastructure in accordance with the Project Design Features and implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-1, less than significant impacts are anticipated. d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation Based on the most current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM No. 06065C2900H), effective April 19, 2017, the entire project site is located in Zone D, a FEMA designation which applies to areas where there are possible but undetermined or unmapped flood hazards. As currently designated, the site is not mapped as a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). FEMA Zone A designations are mapped for a portion of the Guadalupe dike and Dike No. 4 containment areas, found north and east of the project respectively. In part due to the alluvial fan conditions observed in the project setting, the project -specific Drainage Master Plan serves as the reference document for identifying the existing drainage conditions and necessary flood control measures. The proposed infrastructure will include adequate flood protection to address the local alluvial fan conditions, while protecting the project site from ephemeral drainages without resulting in hydromodifications. With the proposed flood control infrastructure in accordance with the Project Design Features and implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-1, less than significant impacts are anticipated pertaining to flood hazards. Tsunami: The project is not located near any coastal areas and therefore is not prone to tsunami hazards. No impacts are associated with this aspect. Seiche Zone: A seiche is primarily defined by free or standing wave oscillations on the surface of water, the causes of which may be wind, atmospheric changes, or seismic activity. The project site is not located in a mapped seiche zone or is located near a large body of water that would pose an unmapped risk. Reservoir design standards include measures to prevent potential rocking or destabilization associated with seismic activity. The proposed retention basins include the required emergency overflow spillways designed to convey controlled stormwater flows beyond the design capacity toward the retention area in Dike No. 4. Less than significant impacts are anticipated with this aspect. Risk Release of Pollutants: Due to the BMPs incorporated into the Project design through the WQMP and proposed land uses, the proposed land uses and facilities are not expected to involve the storage or handling of substantial amounts of chemicals, petroleum products or other hazardous materials, such that pollutant release would occur in the event of inundation. Project runoff will be conveyed to an on - site storm drain system with surface detention basins and associated bio-remediation functions that as part of their function will prevent ponding or other uncontrolled drainage conditions that could allow for pollutant releases. Therefore, the impact is less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-34 October 2023 506 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY e. Conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan As discussed previously, the project proponent is required to implement a project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to comply with the most current standards of the Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff, Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit. Moreover, the project's storm water retention facilities will ensure that urban runoff is recharged into the ground via infiltration. As discussed previously, the design of stormwater facilities will protect the CVWD recharge basins from intrusion of surface flows which can impact the functionality of the basins by introducing excess sedimentation or other contaminants. The WSA/WSV prepared for this project compiled sufficient evidence for approval by CVWD. The findings of this document 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. Further discussion of domestic water is found in the Utilities and Public Services sections of this DEIR. As such, project implementation is not expected to conflict with the regional groundwater management strategies or with the Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan. Pertaining to conflicts with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated. 4.10.5 Cumulative Impacts Project implementation would result in physical changes to the project setting in the form of grading and permanent construction improvements, including flood protection designed to serve the proposed community and to work with the existing drainage conditions and receiving facilities. The proposed project will be required to implement stormwater management through the implementation of NPDES permit and City engineering standards. Drainage conditions resulting from the increase in impervious surfaces created by the project will be controlled through a system of private drainage pipes, catch basins and retention facilities designed to control the 100-year storm on -site, consistent with City requirements. Cumulative impacts would occur when existing development, the proposed project and future development allowed by the General Plan combine to create water quality and flooding hazards. However, the City implements the same requirements for water quality management and on -site retention for all projects, in order to prevent cumulative hydrology impacts. Additionally, downgradient properties are protected from project flows by Dike No. 4. Therefore, because of the standards implemented by the City, CVWD and other responsible agencies, cumulative impacts associated with hydrology and water quality will remain less than significant for the cumulative projects under General Plan buildout because all such projects will also be required implement stormwater management respectively. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-35 October 2023 507 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.10.6 Mitigation Measures HWQ-1: The Operations and Maintenance (0&M) plan shall include provisions to monitor and remove sediment along the west bank to maintain the required conveyance and freeboard conditions. Other aspects of the bank maintenance shall be identified based on the final design configuration of the systems. A Flood Control Facilities Operations and Maintenance Manual for the proposed improvements shall be prepared and submitted to CVWD for review and approval. The manual shall meet the requirements of Section 5.8.9 of the Development Design Manual. 4.10.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and regulatory compliance, less than significant impacts are anticipated. 4.10.8 References 1. Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan (Drainage Master Plan), Q3 Consulting, November 10, 2020 2. Travertine Project Preliminary Hydrology Study for Tentative Tract Map 37387, Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc., November 2021 3. Travertine Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc., September 2021 4. Water Supply Assessment/Verification for the Travertine Specific Plan Project, The Altum Group, February 2018. 5. City of La Quinta Master Drainage Plan, March 2009 6. City of La Quinta General Plan 2017, Flooding and Hydrology Section of the Environmental Hazards Element (Chapter 4), February 2013 7. Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan, part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater Master Plan, April 2015 8. Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/laws- regulations/summary-clean-water-act 9. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 06065C2900H, effective April 19, 2017 10. Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Plan. 11. Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Basin Plan), January 2019. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-36 October 2023 508 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 12. Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the associated Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, effective June 20, 2013. 13. 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan, December 2018. Travertine Draft EIR 4.10-37 October 2023 509 Page intentionally blank 510 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.11 Land Use and Planning 4.11 Land Use and Planning 4.11.1 Introduction This section of the Draft EIR addresses potential impacts associated with land use and planning that may occur with implementation of the proposed Travertine Project. The Project history related to land use, existing conditions, development, and land use designations within the property are described in this section along with potential land use impacts relating to development of the Project. The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment ("Project"), the City of La Quinta General Plan, the Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and the Southern California Association of Government's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy were utilized in the analysis of this land use and planning section. 4.11.2 Existing Conditions The Project property is located within the Travertine Specific Plan (SP) area, which occupies approximately 909 acres in the southern portion of City of La Quinta corporate limits. The Travertine Specific Plan was approved in 1995 by the La Quinta City Council, with the submittal of the Travertine Specific Plan and Green Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. The Travertine and Green Environmental Impact Report analyzed the Travertine SP area, along with the Green SP area, located north of the Travertine site. The 1995 Travertine SP proposed Very Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Golf Course Open Space land uses. The 1995 Plan allows for 2,300 residential dwelling units, 10 acres of commercial uses, 500-room resort/hotel, a 36-hole golf course, and a tennis club on 909 acres. The Project property is generally bounded by the Coral Mountain rock outcropping and undeveloped downslope land to the north; the extension of Avenue 62 and Madison Street (as an emergency access route) and the BOR/CVWD Dike No. 4 levee and related stormwater impoundments to the east; Martinez Mountain and the Martinez Rockslide to the south; and vacant and undisturbed land to the west. Table 4.11-1, Surrounding Land Uses, lists the surrounding land uses in greater detail. The majority of the Project property is undeveloped, lying on broad gently sloping alluvial fans, with shrubs, boulders, and rocks scattered throughout the site. Approximately 220 acres of the Project property was previously developed and operated as a vineyard, occupying a central portion of the property. The vineyard has been abandoned since 2007. Surrounding Land Uses As stated previously, the Travertine Specific Plan property is surrounded by vacant land, Santa Rosa Mountain ranges, and lands owned by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), US Bureau of Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-1 October 2023 511 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Reclamation (BOR) and the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM). CVMSHCP Conservation Areas are located west and south of the Project. Table 4.11-1, Surrounding Land Uses, further describes the surrounding land uses. Table 4.11-1 Surrounding Land Uses Location Exiting Use • Guadalupe Channel, owned by BLM and BOR, maintained by CVWD North . Lake Cahuilla County Park and Lake Cahuilla, approximately 1-mile north • Golf course communities including Andalusia and PGA West, approximately 1-mile north • BLM (Martinez Slide) — Open Space/Wilderness Area South • CVMSCHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area • Vacant Land owned by: BOR and CVWD East • Private vacant lands • Trilogy Golf Club at La Quinta • Vacant, private lands • BLM lands, including Open Space/Wilderness and CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto West Mountains Conservation Area • Other BOR-owned land Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-2 October 2023 512 e��-...do- w-avm ©' � � \ '\ «r :� w cuw r •�-n I � rt4 pro I � we �N►a I wq- Nu► w AFJPtl), i II �N�r Wit✓ 1 �I ± M>� a+ �'r�° $ A lM.gd�r wAa.Nx�m.e a II C)OIMY OF gV6iB�E __ -n -+f-►—__-.— Doi SEQ.5 TM, R7E ifil iI I I I 151 e o IN ! I I US, 117E, SBM 0 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Source: TRG Land, Inc. AYBNE 64 0 CVWD PRIVATE 7R 30023-1 ►1B 329107-102 1� I\\ AIfAI I 1 `'tl�� I • 1I m ,R 30023-1 114SACONSULTING INC. OWNERSHIP MAP I• _ Cr+�l IIrd1JF:Usl4 , qt A�lr 1�i tC�.' , t4 : TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT 4.'A-1 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Project Site History In 1988-1989 the Project property was part of a land exchange, known as the Toro Canyon Land Exchange, between the BLM, Berkey and Associates and the Nature Conservancy, to dispose of public lands that would be more suitable for development in exchange for private land to the south that provides important habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep. As part of the land exchange, the Travertine Project property would be developable in accordance with land use planning designations established by the County of Riverside, as the land use authority for the site at that time. The exchange consisted of the following: • Five sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains, four sections owned by Travertine property owners and one section owned by the Nature Conservancy; together comprising 3,207 acres within the Santa Rosa Mountain National Scenic Area, were offered to the BLM. • One section of land owned by the BLM comprising approximately 639 acres was offered to the Travertine property owners. • Upon approval of the Toro Canyon Land Exchange, the approximately 639 acres were combined with approximately 270 acres of adjacent acres to create the Travertine project site for a total of approximately 909 acres of developable land. The County of Riverside included the Travertine Project property within its Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVCP) area, a subarea of the County General Plan. The ECVCP land use designation for the site's lower elevation — the flatter portions of the property — was "Planned Residential Reserve". This designation was intended to allow for large scale, self-contained resort communities. The steeper portions of the site were designated as "Mountainous Areas" in the ECVCP. Land uses permitted in areas covered by this designation include Open Space, limited recreational uses, limited single family residential, landfills, and resource development. Once the Toro Canyon Land Exchange was approved, the City of La Quinta began annexation proceedings for the Travertine Project property. The annexation was complete in 1993 with the Project property designated for Low Density Residential (LDR, 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) and Open Space (1 dwelling units per acre) land uses. As previously stated, the Travertine Specific Plan was approved in 1995, with the certification of the Travertine Specific Plan and Green Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report by the City of La Quinta City Council by the adoption of Resolution 95-38 and 95-39, subject to conditions of approval and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Along with the Travertine Specific Plan, the corresponding General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone were also approved. In June 1999, the La Quinta Planning Commission re -approved the Specific Plan for the Travertine Project property to allow for an extension of time by adoption of Resolution 1999-061. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-4 October 2023 514 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING In June 2004, a request was submitted to the BLM and BOR to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to initiate consultation under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) regarding potential impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep and designated critical habitat from implementation of the Approved 1995 Specific Plan. A Biological Assessment (BA) was completed in 2004 and a Biological Opinion (BO) was completed by USFWS in December 2005. The BO was supported by an Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and concluded that the conservation measures proposed, including setbacks from habitat and the types of vegetation allowed near the southern and western property lines, would be appropriate for the preservation of any critical habitat that existed in the area and that development of the site would not interfere with bighorn sheep or their critical habitat. Implementation of the approved Specific Plan also required acquisition of additional right-of-way along the major roadways (Jefferson Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 62) from the BLM and BOR. This resulted in the need for a federal EA to be prepared and circulated. This EA was certified in 2006. Archaeological/paleontological surveys, jurisdictional delineation, hydrology study, and a Biological Assessment were completed as part of this EA process to evaluate the impacts of Project development. Consultation with the resource agencies resulted in development of additional conservation measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep. The Applicant also worked with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to ensure that proposed land uses would be compatible with the CVMSHCP. It was concluded that development of the Project property is a "Covered Activity" pursuant to the CVMSHCP provided that all conservation measures are implemented. These conservation measures are further discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources. Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations The existing General Plan and Zoning designations of the Project property are those that were approved bythe City as part of the 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan. The Approved Specific Plan established site -specific standards and guidelines for the Project and identified a number of land uses. The City's 1995 approvals included a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change which established the existing site land use designations. Existing General Plan Land Use Designations (2035 GP) Low Density Residential (Up to 4 units per acre) The Low Density Residential designation is appropriate for single-family residential development, whether attached or detached. The density of individual parcels is further refined in the Zoning Ordinance. These lands are typically developed as subdivisions, country club developments, or master planned communities. Clustered housing projects, providing common area open space, appropriately scaled commercial development serving the project or amenities are also allowed under this designation, with the approval of a specific plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-5 October 2023 515 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Medium/High Density Residential (Up to 16 units per acre) The Medium/High Density Residential designation is designed to accommodate a broad range of residential land uses, including small -lot subdivisions, duplex, condominium and apartment projects. Specific plans may be appropriate for clustered development in the lower density zones, but are not required. Small retail stores that provide neighborhood conveniences, are less than 5,000 square feet, and on parcels of up to one acre, may be allowed of a Conditional Use Permit. General Commercial The General Commercial designation applies to the majority of commercial land in the City of La Quinta. The full range of commercial uses can occur within this designation, ranging from supermarkets and drugstores in a neighborhood shopping, to major national retailers in large buildings. General Commercial uses also include professional offices, service businesses, restaurants, hotels or motels, research and development and warehousing or similar low impact quasi -industrial projects. Tourist Commercial The Tourist Commercial land use designation is specifically geared to tourism -related land uses, such as resort hotels, hotels and motels, and resort commercial development, such as conference centers, restaurants, resort -supporting retail and services (including day spas and similar personal services). Time share, fractional ownership or similar projects may also be appropriate in this designation, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Recreational Open Space The Recreational Open Space designation applies to parks, recreation facilities (such as driving ranges, club houses and athletic facilities), and public and private golf courses. Natural Open Space The Natural Open Space designation is applied to areas of natural open space, whether owned by private parties or public entities. With the exception of limited trail or trailhead development, little development is permitted in this designation. Major Community Facilities This land use designation has been assigned to existing or planned municipal, educational or public facilities, such as City and School District facilities and buildings, utility facilities and buildings, fire stations, and public parking lots and similar uses. Exhibit 4.11-2, Existing General Plan Land Use Designations, illustrates the existing General Plan land use designations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-6 October 2023 516 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Proposed Land Use Designations A General Plan Amendment will amend the current General Plan land use designations from Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Major Community Facilities, and Recreational Open Space to Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.11-3, Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations. Compared to the existing land use designations, the Project proposes to remove the Major Community Facilities and General Commercial land use designations. This is indicated in Table 4.11-2 below. Table 4.11-2 Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations Land Use Approved Specific Plan (Existing) proposed Specific Plan Low Density Residential 382.2 acres 318.0 acres Medium/High Density Residential 84.4 acres 60.8 acres Tourist Commercial 30.9 acres 84.5 acres Recreational Open Space 365.3 acres 55.9 acres Natural Open Space 12.2 acres 301.2 acres Major Community Facilities 4.1 acres -- General Commercial 10.0 acres -- Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-7 October 2023 517 i •• I • 1 Martinez Rock Slide ! Existing General Plan General Plan Designation Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 Medium /High Residential 84.4 774 Tourist Commercial 30.9 Open Space -Recreation 365.3 Open Space -Natural 12.2 Major Community Facilites 4.1 General Commercial 10.0 Master Planned Roadways 20.1 Total 909.2 2300 I ' 1 5r, 5.�. •, I : U . 1 II 1 l AVENUE 62 LEGEND Low Density Residential � Tourist Commercial � Major Community Facilities � Proposed Specific Plan Boundary Medium/High Density Residential 0 Open Space -Recreation � Existing Specific Plan Boundary _ General Commercial 0 Open Space -Natural Source: TRG Land. Inc. A' NSULTING G. i I'•i � r. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN } �L�r���lr��'} � iVl_ � ��rllillk°F��IC; �.4;,,:��Y:�.�y�=•�.,,�,,, TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT4.$1-2 PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET L I NAP LOOP STREET ; EAST �II 1 I LOOP STREET ' WEST AVENUE 62 � I r IMartinez Rock Slide ll`w' M Proposed General Plan General Plan Designation Acres Units Low Density Residential 318.0 758 Medium/ High Residential 60.8 442 Tourist Commercial 84.5 Open Space -Recreation 55.9 Open Space -Natural 301.2 Major Community Facilites General Commercial Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Tota I 855.4 1200 LEGEND 0 Low Density Residential 0 Open Space - Recreation 0 Proposed Specific Plan Boundary 0 Medium / High Density Residential 0 Open Space - Natural 0 Tourist Commercial Source: TRG Land, Inc. A. ON SUL.TI N, INC, PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN f�5laJit;FLJjc;TRAVERTINE �.t��1iL7?:�.19�a.i�l,{•,I EXHIBIT501-3 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Existing Zoning Designations (Title 9 LQMQ Low Density Residential (RL) RL districts provide for the development and preservation of low -density neighborhoods (2 to 4 units per acre) with one- and two-story single-family detached dwellings on large or medium size lots and/or, subject to a specific plan, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such as one- and two-story single- family attached, townhome or condominium dwellings, with generous open space. Medium High Density Residential (RMH) RMH districts provide for the development and preservation of medium -high density neighborhoods (8 to 12 units per acre) with one- and two-story single-family detached dwellings on small lots, one- and two-story single-family attached dwellings, and one- and two-story townhome and multifamily dwellings. Neighborhood Commercial (CN) CN districts provide for the development and regulation of small-scale commercial areas located at the intersections of arterial highways as shown on the general plan. The CN district is intended to provide for the sale of food, drugs, sundries, and personal services to meet the daily needs of a neighborhood area. Tourist Commercial (CT) CT districts provide for the development and regulation of a narrow range of specialized commercial uses oriented to tourist and resort activity, located in areas designated on the general plan. Golf Course (GC) GC districts provide for the protection and preservation of golf course open space areas in the City. Open Space (OS) OS districts provide for the protection and preservation of sensitive environmental areas such as areas with significant cultural resources, threatened or endangered plant and wildlife species habitat, scenic resources, and significant topographical constraints. Exhibit 4.11-4, Existing Zoning Designations, shows the existing zoning designations established by the Approved Specific Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-10 October 2023 520 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Proposed Zoning Designations The Zone Change will modify the zoning designation of the development to include the following: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential (MDR), Tourist Commercial, and Open Space. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.11-5, Proposed Zoning Plan. Compared to the existing zoning designations, the Project proposes the removal of the Medium High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial zones, and the addition of the Medium Density Residential zone. This is displayed in Table 4.11-3, Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations, below. Medium Density Residential districts provide for the development and preservation of medium density neighborhoods (4 to 8 units per acre) with single-family detached dwellings on medium and small size lots and/or, subject to a specific plan, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such as one- and two- story single-family attached, townhome, or multifamily dwellings, with open space. Table 4.11-3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations Zone Approved Specific Plan Proposed Specific Plan Low Density Residential 382.2 acres 318.0 acres Medium High Density Residential 84.4 acres -- Medium Density Residential -- 60.8 acres Neighborhood Commercial 10.0 acres -- Tourist Commercial 30.9 acres 84.5 acres Golf Course 377.5 acres -- Open Space 4.1 acres 357.1 acres Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Table 3, Zoning Plan Comparison Compared to the existing Specific Plan, the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment: • Preserves 35 percent of the project area as permanent open space. • Reduces the number of dwelling units by 1,100 residences, or 52 percent. • Reduces the acreage of golf uses from 363 acres to 46.2 acres, or 79 percent. • Reduces the number of resort rooms from 500 to 100, or 80 percent. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-11 October 2023 521 Existing Zoning Plan Zoning Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 Medium Density Residential Medium / High Residential 84.4 774 Neighborhood Commercial 10.0 Tourist Commercial 30.9 Golf Course 377.5 Open Space 4.1 Master Planned Roadways 1 20.1 Total 1 909.2 2300 F tNAjPjjL.. I � 1"W rr , , -i, r i Martinez . Rock Slide I , I EGEND RL Low Density Residential _ Tourist Commercial Proposed Specific Plan Boundary RMH Medium High Density Residential _ Golf Course Existing Specific Plan Boundary CN Neighborhood Commercial _ Open Space Source: TRG Land, Inc. NSULTI14 G I N C, EXISITING ZONING } LI'rNtni� } r4a _ Eai�a a�� F7!JiCj wltiti L' i�I.lU�n{;1 TRAVERTINE EXHIB115P 1-4 PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET I -F LOOP STREET - I I Martinez Rock Slide - Proposed Zoning Plan Zoning Acres Units Low Density Residential 318.0 758 Medium Density Residential 60.8 442 Medium / High Residential Neighborhood Commercial - Tourist Commercial 84.5 Golf Course Open Space 357.1 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Tota 1 855.4 1200 =ET IL ! f AVENUE 62 LEGEND RL Low Density Residential OS Open Space 0 Proposed Specific Plan Boundary _ Medium Density Residential _ Tourist Commercial Source: TRG Land, Inc. 1A.OSUL.TINr INC. s a�FJ�J!N� } � Iul, �lJri,l!��� A'!�C! �•w �� 1i L} illUjv��l!�;1 PROPOSED ZONING TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT 4?P-5 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING 4.11.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Federal Endangered Species Act The purpose of the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) is to provide a program for the conservation of endangered and threatened species. The Act establishes protections for fish, wildlife, and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered; provides for adding species to and removing them from the list of threatened and endangered species, and for preparing and implementing plans for their recovery. The Act also provides for interagency cooperation to avoid take and listed species and for issuing permits for otherwise prohibited activities; provides for cooperation with States, including authorization of financial assistance; and implements the provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES). The lead federal agencies for implementing the FESA is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The USFWS maintains a worldwide list of endangered species including birds, insects, fish, reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, flowers, grasses, and trees. Critical Habitats for species listed under the FESA were reviewed during the preparation of the Biological Report (Appendix D.1). Federal Land Use Policy Management Act The Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) states that federal land should remain under federal ownership and established a regulatory system for the BLM to manage federal lands. The Act sets out a multiple use management policy for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in which the agency would balance its management of the land to meet diverse needs, including recreation, grazing, timber and mineral production, fish and wildlife, protection, and oil and gas production. The FLPMA is implemented by the Visual Resource Management (VRM) program. California Desert Conservation Area The California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) is a 25-million-acre expanse of land in Southern California designated by Congress in 1976 through the FLPMA. The CDCA includes the Death Valley National Park to the north and extends south to the California -Mexico border. The goal of the CDCA Plan is to provide for the use of the public lands and resources, including biological, economic, educational, scientific, and recreational uses, in a manner which enhances, whenever possible, the environmental, cultural, and aesthetic values of the Desert and its productivity. The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument is located within the CDCA. The CDCA is implemented by the VRM program and outlined in the FLMPA. State Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-14 October 2023 524 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Planning and Zoning Law California's Planning and Zoning Law enables cities and counties in California to form planning commissions and to prepare, adopt, and amend comprehensive plans and zoning regulations. Individual sections address provisions and requirements for regional planning districts (Sections 65060-65069.5), local planning (Sections 65100-65763), and zoning regulations (Sections 65800-65912). Cities and counties are required to prepare and adopt general plans (Section 65300). City and county zoning ordinances are required to be consistent with the general plan (Section 65860). Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8, Specific Plans Sections 65450 to 65457 of the Government Code addresses the implementation of specific plans. After the legislative body has adopted a general plan, the planning agency may, or if so directed by the legislative body, shall, prepare specific plans for the systematic implementation of the general plan for all or part of the area covered by the general plan. Per Government Code Section 65451(a), a specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: 1. The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. 2. The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. 3. Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. 4. A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3). California Endangered Species Act The purpose of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) is to conserve and protect plant and animal species at risk of extinction, specifically in the State of California. CESA was originally enacted in 1970, repealed and replaced in 1984, and amended in 1997. Approximately 250 species are currently listed under CESA. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) implements CESA and works with agencies, organizations, and other interested persons to study, protect, and preserve CESA-listed species and their habitats. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-15 October 2023 525 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Natural Community Conservation Planning Act Beginning in 1991, the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP) identifies and provides for the regional protection of plants, animals, and their habitats, while allowing compatible and appropriate economy activity for the protection and perpetuation of biological diversity. CDFW and the USFWS provides support, direction and guidance during the development of the NCCP. The Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) is an approved plan under the NCCP. Senate Bill 375 Senate Bill (SB) 375 directs the California Air Resources Board to set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In order to achieve reduction targets, SB 375 (1) uses the regional transportation planning process, (2) offers CEQA incentives to encourage projects that are consistent with a regional plan that achieves GHG reductions, and (3) coordinates the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) process with the regional transportation process while maintaining local authority over land use decisions. Regional Southern California Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SCAG's 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (also known as "Connect SoCal") is a plan for mobility, accessibility, sustainability, and a high quality of life in the region. It is first and foremost, a transportation plan that integrates land use planning into its framework to improve mobility and access to transportation options in response to Senate Bill (SB) 375. The goals within the RTP/SCS are meant to provide guidance for the project within the context of regional goals and polices. Therefore, the goals in the RTP/SCS may be pertinent to the proposed Project. The Goals and Guiding Policies set forth in RTP/SCS are listed below. Most of the goals can be adapted and implemented at the local level by the City of La Quinta such as maximizing mobility and accessibility for all people and goods. This is being achieved by the City's commitment to good roads where intersections can accommodate round-abouts instead of 4-way stops or traffic signals where vehicles stop and idle; and where streets can be designed to accommodate motor vehicles and non -motorized vehicles such as bicycles and golf carts/neighborhood electric vehicles. 2020-2045 RTP-SCS Goals RTP/SCS G1 Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness. RTP/SCS G2 Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety for all people and goods. RTP/SCS G3 Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-16 October 2023 526 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING RTP/SCS G4 Increase person and goods movement and travel choices within the transportation system. RTP/SCS G5 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. RTP/SCS G6 Support healthy and equitable communities. RTP/SCS G7 Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network. RTP/SCS G8 Leverage new transportation technologies and data -driven solutions that result in more efficient travel. RTP/SCS G9 Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas that are supported by multiple transportation options. RTP/SCS G10 Promote conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration habitats. Riverside County General Plan The Land Use Element in the Riverside County General Plan (RCGP) acts as a guide to planners, the general public, and decision makers as to the ultimate pattern of development. The Element also identifies and defines land uses throughout the County and land use compatibility with adjacent uses. The following RCGP policies are related to land use compatibility are provided below. The following policies pertain to land use compatibility: LU 7.1 Require land uses to develop in accordance with the General Plan and area plans to ensure compatibility and minimize impacts. LU 7.2 Notwithstanding the Public Facilities designation, public facilities shall also be allowed in any other land use designation except for the Open -Space Conservation and Open Space — Conservation Habitat land use designations. For purposes of this policy, a public facility shall include all facilities shall include all facilities operated by the federal government, the State of California, the County of Riverside, any special district governed by or operating within the County of Riverside or any city, and all facilities operated by any combination of these agencies. Coachella Valley Association of Governments The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) is the regional planning agency coordinating government services in the Coachella Valley. CVAG is composed of several departments, including an Energy and Environmental Resources Department and Transportation Department. The Energy and Environmental Resources Department promotes sustainable use of natural resources and the preservation of the natural heritage of the Coachella Valley by implementing plans relating to energy and air quality, waste management, water, habitat conservation, and trails. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-17 October 2023 527 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) is a regional multi -agency conservation plan that provides for the long-term conservation of ecological diversity in the Coachella Valley. The CVMSHCP includes an area of approximately 1.1 million acres in the Coachella Valley. The CVMSCHP ensures the conservation of the covered species and conserved natural communities in perpetuity. The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is a joint powers authority comprised of members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, an elected official from each of the cities, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, and Mission Springs Water District. Implementation of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan is overseen by the CVCC. The CVCC provides policy direction for the plan, and opportunities for public participation in the decision -making process. Additional CVCC responsibilities include overseeing the Monitoring Program Administration, establishing a Reserve Management Unit, participating in the Joint Project Review Process, and preparing an Annual Report. Land Use Adjacency Guidelines The Land Use Adjacency Guidelines were established by the CVMSHCP for projects adjacent to conservation areas. The purpose of the Guideline is to avoid or minimize indirect effects from development adjacent to or within the Conservation Areas. Such indirect effects are commonly referred to as edge effects, and may include noise, lighting, drainage, intrusion of people, and the introduction of non-native plants and non-native predators such as dogs and cats. The following Land Use Adjacency Guidelines will aid in minimizing edge effects and shall be implemented where applicable. 4.5.1 Drainage Proposed Development adjacent to or within a Conservation Area shall incorporate plans to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the adjacent Conservation Area is not altered in an adverse way when compared with existing conditions. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes within the adjacent Conservation Area. A S 7 Tnvirc Land uses proposed adjacent to or within a Conservation Area that use chemicals or generate bioproducts such as manure that are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife and plant species, habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that application of such chemicals does not result in any discharge to the adjacent Conservation Area. 4.5.3 Lighting Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-18 October 2023 528 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING For proposed Development adjacent to or within a Conservation Area, lighting shall be shielded and directed toward the developed area. Landscape shielding or other appropriate methods shall be incorporated in project designs to minimize the effects of lighting adjacent to or within the adjacent Conservation Area in accordance with the guidelines to be included in the Implementation Manual. 4.5.4 Noise Proposed noise generating land uses with the potential to affect adjacent conservation lands shall incorporate setbacks, berms or walls to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife pursuant to applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines related to land use noise standards. 4.5.5 Invasives Projects adjacent to conservation lands shall avoid the use of invasive plant species in landscaping. a S F Rarriorc Land uses adjacent to or within a Conservation Area shall incorporate barriers in individual project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping in a Conservation Area. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls and/or signage. Local La Quinta General Plan The La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) is a guiding policy document for the City, written in compliance with applicable State and Federal legislation, as it has been since the City's first General Plan. California Government Code Section 65302 establishes seven mandatory elements of the General Plan: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Safety, and Noise. The General Plan includes all the required elements, as well as additional elements specifically tailored to the City's needs. The Land Use Element in the LQGP, impacts the City's growth and provides the greatest guidance in the City's vision for its buildout. The Land Use Element includes the Land Use Map, which is the long-term guide to development and redevelopment in the City, as well as providing policies and programs that define and shape high quality residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development in the City. Land Use goals and policies relevant to the proposed Project are provided in discussion 4.11.4.b of this Land Use and Planning Section. La Quinta Municipal Code The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) acts as a regulatory guideline, compliant with state and federal laws, for the City of La Quinta. The LQMC regulates businesses, zoning, animals, vehicles and traffic, peace and morals, health and sanitation, and more. Regulations regarding land use and zoning are Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-19 October 2023 529 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING discussed in great detail within Title 9, Zoning, in the LQMC. The purpose of the Zoning Code within the LQMC is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare pursuant to Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, the State Planning and Zoning Law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and other applicable state laws. The Zoning Code classifies and designates different land uses and structures in appropriates places as designed in the general plan, and to regulate such land uses and structures in order to serve the needs of residential neighborhoods, commerce, recreation, open space, and other purposes. Per LQMC, Section 9.240.010, Specific Plan Review, a specific plan is a detailed plan covering a selected area of the city for the purpose of implementation of the general plan. Section 9.240.010 states that the following required findings shall be made by the City Council prior to approval of any specific plan or specific plan amendment: 1. Consistency with General Plan: The plan or amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan. 2. Public Welfare: Approval of the plan or amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. 3. Land Use Compatibility: The specific plan is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties. 4. Property Sustainability: The specific plan is suitable and appropriate for the subject property. 4.11.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The City utilizes the recommended thresholds of significance in Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines to analyze the significance of project impacts on land use. The City's application of the recommended thresholds of significance are informed by Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to Appendix G, the project may have a potentially significant impact to land use if it: a. Physically divides an established community; or b. Causes a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Methodology The determination of the Project's consistency with applicable land use plans and policies is based upon a review of the previously identified planning documents that regulate land use or guide land use decisions at and around the Project property. The land use development standards set out in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) were considered in determining the Project's consistency with applicable land use plans. The Specific Plan Amendment is intended to guide future development within the project boundary in a manner that is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan while maintaining flexibility to respond to changing conditions that factor in any long-term development. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-20 October 2023 530 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Project Design Features The approximately 855-acre Project property proposes a high quality, master planned residential community comprised of a Resort/Spa, varied residential uses, golf practice facilities, and various open space and recreational uses. Travertine will offer a variety of housing and recreational amenities. The housing sizes and styles will be designed to meet the needs of all age groups. The recreational amenities will include a 5-mile-long public trail that will be developed around the perimeter of the Project property; a central private spine trail that bisects the residential areas of the property; on -street bike paths; preservation of natural open space; additional private parks located within the development area; a skills golf course and golf academy; and a resort and spa with restaurants, shops and activities. Table 4.11-4 identifies the overall land use summary proposed for the property. Table 4.11-4 Land Use Summary Land Use Acres Percent Residential 378.8 44.3 Resort/Golf Club Facilities 84.5 9.9 Open Space Uses 357.1 41.7 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 4.1 Total 855.4 ac. 100% *The change from 909.0 acres in the original approval to 855.4 acres is due to the revision of the project boundary along the west and south sides of the site. 31 acres of the previously approved project site has been set aside as a Resources Protection Area for Cultural Resources and is no longer part of the proposed Specific Plan planning area. The Project has reduced its development area from 909 (1995 SP) to 855.4 acres to avoid potential impacts to biological and cultural resources. These areas are designated for restricted open space and natural open space. See Project Site History above. Exhibit 4.11-6, Planning Area Map, illustrates the proposed planning areas. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-21 October 2023 531 RErl_._ iYi�IYT L . — GA�0.0C+A5 18.31 t+[ 3.j.li "La L2.. .. ' r • 1 k rws 2!d CLb ' , R LfkOR as DU ?�IAr- i L� LOOP STREET 'K'iAr, W WEST I Ba1AC I L 8 SboeE +�'• 167 AC Lae M GJ 1 O ro 0YKIr 97AC os6u 11 a AP2 COMMUNITY PARK WEST PA -Tr Its.. .a oL1 • 2Rx� h a! I 4 Ma Roc LOOP STREET EAST OOP ai 6 L -kc ID Y•RG COMMUNITY PARK EAST rwa LOR °01c Q� 1' It.,sa AVENUE 62 `id• ;LVIR PA sCcess LA d� n i A0 4 U 02 LEGEND 0 Low Density Residential - 318 Ac _ Open Space / Recreational - 55.9 Ac 0 Medium Density Residential - 60.8 Ac _ Open Space / Natural - 301.2 Ac Total Acreage: 855.4 Ac _ Resort - Golf Club - 84.5 Ac 0 Master Planned Roadways - 35.0 Ac Source: TRG Land, Inc. IIIASA-CONSULTING INC. PLANNING AREA MAP sJLAHrVi'drra Iul, �.Ijf; NEcPl!dC. %L}irLlUjv� 11�;1 TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT PA-6 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Residential The Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project proposes a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units based on range of lot sizes, resulting in an overall average density for the Project of 1.4 dwelling units per gross - acre (du/ac). Residential Planning Areas would vary in density from 1.5 du/ac to 8.5 du/ac. Six residential types are proposed: - Estate Homes - Single Family Luxury Homes - Single Family Mid Homes - Single Family Entry Homes - Patio Homes - Single Family Attached Units There will also be two community parks (in Planning Areas 5 and 13) combined totaling approximately 13.5 acres. Within individual residential tracts, there will also be the opportunity for local pocket parks as an amenity subject to future tract designs. Community and pocket parks will only be accessible to the future residents of the Project. General Plan Low Density Residential Single Family Detached — Low Density Residential category will occupy Planning Areas 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12 to 16, and will be characterized by larger, single-family residential lots (6,300 to 9,600 square feet) with the opportunity for custom homes. These homes will have the largest setbacks in the development, as well as the smallest maximum lot coverage. The Project proposes approximately 758 low density residential dwelling units consistent with the General Plan land use designation. General Plan Medium/High Density Residential Medium/High Density Residential, located within Planning Areas 2, 6 and 9, reflect the transition between the lower density golf, residential housing and open space development and the resort/spa development. This area is intended to provide medium/high density single-family residential products to accommodate residents seeking lots ranging from 4,000 to 5,775 square feet in size. The Project proposes up to 442 medium/high density residential units consistent with the General Plan land use designation. Tourist Commercial Tourist Commercial uses are proposed in Planning Areas 1 and 11 and planned to be a part of the Resort and/or Golf use. Facilities will include up to 100 resort villas, and wellness spa, and a golf training facility. Site Development Permits, as well as building permits for any structures associated with the resort, Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-23 October 2023 533 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING hospitality and villas will be submitted as needed by the future developers of the Resort planned areas including Fractional Ownership options. Resort Planning Area 1 Planning Area 1 is intended to include a luxury resort and wellness spa, with resort -related amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, such as tennis, yoga, and walking and hiking trails. Table 4.11-5 PA 1 Indoor Area Proposed Uses Estimated Indoor Area (Square Feet) Resort Facility (Registration, concierge, shops, fitness center, event space, and 45,000 175-seat restaurant) Resort Villas 97,500 Spa and Wellness 8,700 Resort/Golf Planning Area 11 Planning Area 11 would include a golf club with related practice and training facilities, and entertainment/banquet facility for both the residents and guests. Table 4.11-6 PA 11 Indoor Area Proposed Uses Estimated Indoor Area (Square Feet) Banquet Facility Restaurant (500-seat capacity) 10,000 Golf Clubhouse 1,000 Golf Academy 5,500 Open Space Approximately 357.1 acres of the Project property is designated as open space. General Plan Recreational Open Space Recreational Open Space uses will occupy approximately 55.9 acres of the proposed Project property, including Planning Areas 17, 18, and 19. It is designed to offer both passive and active oriented recreational opportunities that include picnic tables, golf facilities, and staging facilities for the regional interpretive trail open to the public. General Plan Natural Open Space Natural Open Space uses will occupy approximately 301.2 acres of the property, identified as Planning Area 20. This Planning Area is located along the eastern, southern, and western boundaries of the property, and are restricted from development due to various environmental constraints including Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-24 October 2023 534 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING biological, geological, and cultural resources. These areas will remain undisturbed to preserve these resources. The only uses that will be allowed in this area are trails and limited infrastructure. Infrastructure and access related to the CVWD reservoir site will be located within the western portion of this Planning Area. Access to the proposed water reservoirs will be provided from a gated private roadway that extends from the Project internal loop road into Planning Area 20 Natural Open Space area. Master Planned Roadways The development of Travertine would include the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a private Modified Secondary Arterial and the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial. Loop roads will branch perpendicularly northeast and southwest of the Jefferson Street spine road via two roundabout intersections. Off -Site Utility Field In addition to the proposed onsite facilities, the Project also proposes an off -site utility field to support the site, including a substation, and five wells. The off -site substation is proposed to occupy a 2.5-acre area, located within a two-mile radius of the Project property. The substation would be developed in coordination with IID and adhere to IID standards and guidelines when development is required. The location of the substation is undetermined. Future analysis, review, and approval will be required to occur when a substation location is determined. Up to five off -site wells will be required for the Project. The well sites would be identified and developed in compliance with CVWD standards and guidelines. The locations of the five wells have not been determined at this time; however, this DER analyzes the well sites and substations in a programmatic manner. Site -specific environmental review of the future well sites and substation would be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively. Project Impacts a. Division of an established community Implementation of the proposed Project would not physically divide an established community. As discussed above in Section 4.11.2, Existing Conditions, the majority of the Project property is currently vacant land, void of any physical structures and consists of broad gentle sloping alluvial fans, with shrubs, boulders and rocks scattered throughout the site. Man-made improvements are found on land adjacent to the Project property including the BOR/CVWD Dike No. 4 and CVWD groundwater recharge basins abutting the Project to the east. Golf course communities (Andalusia, Trilogy and PGA West) lie approximately one mile to the north and northeast. The remaining land surrounding the Project property is vacant. The City has previously approved the development of a master planned community on the Project property through the adoption of the 1995 Specific Plan and the proposed Project sets forth the Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-25 October 2023 535 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING development of a master -planned residential and resort community of a reduced footprint relative to the previously approved Specific Plan. For all of the above reasons, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the division of an established community. Off -Site Utility Field The proposed off -site utility field will host the development of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre electric power substation. The exact locations of these off -site utility field facilities has not been determined; however, based upon consultations with the local water and power providers (CVWD and IID) they are proposed to be located east of the Project property and Dike 4, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west (see Exhibit 3-4 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description). Most of the proposed sites occur on vacant land or land used for agriculture. The proposed sites must meet utility provider requirements which do not require large development footprints. Therefore, the development of the off -site utility field will not physically divide an established community since the proposed off -site properties are not yet developed. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect The Project proposes the development of a mixed -use property including low and medium density residential, open space, and resort uses on a currently vacant site. The existing General Plan land designations include Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space Recreation. As a part of the Project, a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change (ZC) will be processed. The GPA will amend the current General Plan land use designations to Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space. The ZC will revise the existing zoning of the Specific Plan area from Low Density Residential (RL), Medium High Density Residential (RMH), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Tourist Commercial (CT), Golf Course (GC), and Open Space (OS) to RL, Medium Density Residential (MDR), CT, and OS. Along with the GPA and ZC, the Project is requesting approval of a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA), a Tentative Tract Map (TTM), and Development Agreement (DA). The SPA is a land use planning document which, if adopted by the City of La Quinta, would serve as the site -specific zoning document for the Project. Specifically, the SPA provides for the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting infrastructure, as well as development standards and regulations for uses within the Project property. The TTM subdivides the property into smaller lots for subsequent development into lots suitable for the development of the uses permitted for these areas under the SPA. The DA establishes an agreement between the developer and the City regarding the development of the Project property. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-26 October 2023 536 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Implementation of the proposed Project would be in accordance with applicable local and state land use regulations and would not conflict with any established Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation. The following discussion analyzes the land use consistencies of the proposed Project in relation to the City of La Quinta General Plan, the La Quinta Municipal Code, the existing 1995 Approved Specific Plan, the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and the Southern California Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCAG RTP/SCS). See Appendix K for associated tables. La Quinta General Plan Consistency Analysis The City of La Quinta utilizes a Land Use Map and Zoning Designation Map to identify the land use and zoning designations within the City boundaries. As previously stated, the Project site is currently vacant with both undisturbed desert land, and approximately 220 acres of abandoned vineyard. The General Plan land use designation for the Project property is currently defined as Low Density Residential, Medium High Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space. As outlined previously, Project entitlements include a GPA and SPA. The approval of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment would modify the land use designations from Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space to Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space. The Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Recreational Open Space, and Natural Open Space land uses proposed for the project are consistent with the current General Plan land use designations, and do not represent a substantial change to the character of the area as envisioned in the General Plan. A detailed analysis of applicable goals, policies and programs contained in the General Plan was conducted to determine the Project's consistency with the existing plan. The findings are summarized in Table 1, City of La Quinta General Plan Consistency Analysis, in Appendix K. The analysis contained in Table 1 concludes that with approval of the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the Project would remain consistent with the City's General Plan. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in significant land use impacts due to inconsistency with the General Plan. Impacts would be less than significant. La Quinta Zoning Consistency Analysis The existing zoning designations for the Project site includes Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Golf Course, and Open Space. As previously determined, along with the GPA and SPA, the Project applicant will be applying for a Zone Change (ZC). Approval of the ZC and SPA will modify the zoning designations of the development to include the following zones: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-27 October 2023 537 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING and Open Space. The proposed Zone Change would result in the modification of the existing zoning designations at the Project property as previously outlined in Table 4.11-3, Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations. The table is included below for reference. Table 4.11-3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations Zoning Designation Approved Specific Plan (Existing) proposed Specific Plan Low Density Residential (RL) 382.2 acres 318.0 acres Medium High Density Residential (RMH) 84.4 acres -- Medium Density Residential (RM) -- 60.8 acres Neighborhood Commercial (CN) 10.0 acres -- Tourist Commercial (CT) 30.9 acres 84.5 acres Golf Course (GC) 377.5 acres -- Open Space (OS) 4.1 acres 357.1 acres Per Table 4.11-3, the Project will remove the Medium/High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial Zoning Designation, and Golf Course from the property and include Medium Density Residential. This change in zone is due to the decreased dwelling units proposed by the Project and the reduced Project area. The proposed SPA would supersede the current zoning designations on the Project property and set forth the planning areas, land use policies, development standards, and design guidelines for the Project. All development on the Project property shall adhere to the standards and requirements set forth in the SPA. Additionally, any changes to the Specific Plan shall be processed pursuant to California State Government Code Section 65453 and will be subject to the requirements of Section 9.240.010 (Specific Plan Review) of the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance. The review and approval of the proposed Zone Change would not result in significant impacts since the proposed zoning designations decrease land use density and intensity and are compliant with the proposed General Plan uses. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis As noted and discussed at length in other sections of this DEIR (ref. Section 4.4, Biological Resources), the City is located within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley MSHCP (CVMSHCP), to which the City is a "Permittee". The La Quinta Municipal Code Chapter 3.34, CVMSHCP/Natural Community Conservation Plan Mitigation Fee requires the City to collect development impact fees to fund acquisitions, manage conservation lands. Please refer to Section 4.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EIR for a comprehensive discussion of Project consistency with the CVMSHCP. Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-28 October 2023 538 WALL ha ----------- L, EL Id D (bpInthaI& �e.nce,,50 d Will. Source: TRG Land, Inc. CONCEPTUAL WALL PLAN MSA CONSULTI NQ I N C. TRAVERTINE EXHIBITPM-7 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING SCAG RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) provided the City of La Quinta with a letter on April 1, 2020, in response to a Notice of Preparation (NOP). The NOP was circulated from March 9, 2020 to April 8, 2020. Comments from SCAG were related to the Project's consistency with SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan -Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) document and how to evaluate the Project. Analysis regarding the proposed Project's consistency, inconsistency, or inapplicability to SCAG's 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) goals, listed in Section 4.11.3, is summarized in Table 3 in Appendix K. The consistency analysis determined that the proposed Project is consistent with the applicable goals in the RTP/SCS. The Project proposes a mixed -use development that will construct infrastructure supporting the Project and employment opportunities. Multi -use roadways proposed for the Project would allow accessibility through the various land uses onsite. The development of multi -modal paths will create an efficient and accessible roadway system and allows reliable and safe travel throughout the site. These are consistent with RTP/SCS Goals 1-3 and 5-8. RTP/SCS Goals 4 and 9 are associated with the regional transportation system and therefore are not applicable to the Project. Per Table 3, SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Goals Consistency Analysis, (Appendix K) conducted for this Project, it will be consistent with all of the applicable goals of the RTP/SCS. Less than significant impact. Surrounding Areas Properties in proximity to the Project consist of a mix of developed and undeveloped lands. General Plan land uses surrounding the Project property include Low Density Residential to the north, east, south, and west, General Commercial to the east, Medium Density Residential to the east, Open Space Recreation to the north and east, Open Space Natural to the north, west, and south, and Major Community Facilities to the north and east (CVWD percolation ponds). The current zoning designations in the surrounding area include Low Density Residential (RL) to the north, east and west, Medium High Density Residential (RMH) to the east, Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to the east, Golf Course (GC) to the east, and Open Space (OS) to the west and east. RL properties east of the Project have an Equestrian Overlay, which allows the keeping of horses (stabling and riding) on these properties. The developed and undeveloped properties in proximity to the proposed Project property are zoned and designated for residential, commercial, and open space uses. The Project components (neighborhood commercial buildings, low density residential units, tourist commercial/resort, and recreational amenities) are compatible with the surrounding residential, open space, and neighborhood commercial land uses and designations as described above. Based on the consistency analysis prepared for this Project, it will be consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. Impacts will be less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-30 October 2023 540 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING The proposed off -site utility field will host the development of up to five well sites and a 2.5-acre electric power substation. The exact locations of these off -site utility field facilities has not been determined; however, based upon consultations with the local water and power providers (CVWD and IID) they are proposed to be located east of the Project property and Dike 4, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 64 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west (see Exhibit 3-3 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description). Most of the proposed sites occur on vacant land or land used for agriculture. The proposed sites must meet utility provider requirements and be available for purchase in order to develop the off -site utility field. The potential off -site utility field locations may occur within the City's jurisdictional boundaries, or within the incorporated areas of Riverside County. Per the City of La Quinta's Zoning Map, the off -site locations within the City's jurisdiction, are located within the zoning designations Low Density Residential (RL), Medium Density Residential (RM), and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) which allow for public utility facilities. Land use impacts associated with these future facilities are expected to be less than significant. Utility substations and facilities are permitted within RM and RL zoning designations with the approval of a minor use permit. Water wells are permitted as a principal use within the CN zoning district. However, electrical substations are prohibited within this zone. Most of the off -site utility field area is situated outside of La Quinta's jurisdictional boundary. Off -site parcels are located within Riverside County's light industrial zone (A-1). A-1 zones allow public utility facilities with a plot plan approval. The plot plan approval may include conditions requiring fencing and landscaping of the parcel to assure that the use is compatible with the surrounding area. 4.11.5 Cumulative Impacts This discussion of cumulative impacts analyzes the proposed Project as well as future projects involved with the buildout of the City General Plan. The geographic scope for this analysis includes the Project, future projects, and the immediate vicinity where adverse land use impacts could occur. The proposed Project would not divide an established community and is consistent with land use policies of the City's General Plan and zoning standards in the City's Municipal Code. The proposed uses within the Project property would be consistent and compatible with existing and planned land uses surrounding the Project property, including the predominantly residential uses to the north, east, and southeast. The Project would create a cohesive community of residential, mixed -use, and resort uses on vacant and undeveloped land in La Quinta. Upon adoption of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the Project would be consistent with applicable goals and policies in the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. The Project will provide residential uses in proximity to existing and proposed residential communities in the southern portion of the City. Residential homes in the Project property will be consistent with the existing gated -residential communities in the surrounding area. The resort and resort amenities are consistent with the City's policy to support and encourage the expansion of the resort Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-31 October 2023 541 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING industry (Policy LU-6.3) and will be located on the interior of the Project, and will not affect the residential character from public vantage points and streets or surrounding neighborhoods. There are no potential project conflicts or inconsistencies with applicable adopted plans, policies, and regulations, and the Project would not combine with others to result in a substantial cumulative impact. Overall, there will be a less than cumulatively substantial effects on existing and planned land uses generated by this Project. Development of the Project, in conjunction with other cumulative development in the area permitted by the City's General Plan, would not result in citywide and regional land use and planning impacts. As with the Project, related projects and other future growth would be subject to compliance with the local and regional plans reviewed in this section. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the Project would not have a considerable contribution to potential land use conflicts or other impacts. 4.11.6 Mitigation Measures No Mitigation Measures are required. 4.11.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Not applicable. 4.11.8 References 1. Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, 2016, available at https://cvmshcp.org/Plan-Documents/11-CVAG-MSHCP-Plan-Section-4-O.pdf 2. 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, Southern California Association of Governments, https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-connect-socal-2020 Travertine Draft EIR 4.11-32 October 2023 542 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.12 Noise 4.12 Noise 4.12.1 Introduction This section describes the existing noise environment at the Project site and in the vicinity, identifies the significance of the potential impacts on noise resulting from Project implementation, and proposes feasible mitigation measures to reduce any potentially significant noise impacts. Information for this section was obtained from the Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis ("Noise Study"), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., August 2021, for the Project property and off - site utility field (Appendix L.1 and Appendix L.2), the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, also prepared by Urban Crossroads, in September 2021, (Appendix M.1), Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards, Noise Element of the La Quinta General Plan, and the City's Municipal Code. 4.12.2 Existing Conditions Existing Noise Environment The existing noise setting of the area surrounding the Project is dictated by the vacant open space north, west, and south of the Project, the CVWD groundwater recharge facilities and the BOR Dike 4 levee to the east, and golf course and residential communities to the north and east. To assess the existing noise level environment, eight 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at sensitive receiver locations near the Project (indicated in Exhibit 4.12-1, Noise Measurement Locations). The noise level measurements were collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on Wednesday, August 16th, 2017. The noise measurements focus on the average or equivalent sound levels (Leq). The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. The hourly daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise level measurements at each location determined that daytime energy average noise levels (dBA Leq) ranged from 42.9 dBA Leq to 59.8 dBA Leq; while the nighttime noise level ranged from 42.2 to 55.9 dBA Leq. The noise environment is discussed in greater detail in Section 4.12.4, Existing Noise Level Measurements, of this Noise Section. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-1 October 2023 543 hL e '.I �F LEG EMI D; A wi yur i" Source: Noise Study, Urban Crossroads, Inc. FUKgtlon5 : •'-'fAiT a MSA- CONSULTING,IN C. NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS I�• } LIJ'JWN, m . ivl. =!Jr;.IIds PW4Q-5:;Aw122NIA9'. i l'II%, TRAVEF���NE EXHIBIT 2-1 4.12 NOISE 4.12.3 Regulatory Setting The federal government, the State of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the State have established standards and ordinances to control noise. Federal and State agencies generally set noise standards for mobile sources such as aircraft and motor vehicles, while local agencies regulate stationary sources. State State of California Building Standards The State's noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2, and the California Building Code (CBC). These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for controlling interior noise levels resulting from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise -sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are developed near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans for noise -sensitive land uses must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. Construction of new residential buildings, schools, and hospitals must meet the acceptable interior noise limit of 45 dBA CNEL. Regional and Local Riverside County General Plan Since the City of La Quinta does not identify specific construction vibration level standards, Riverside County's General Plan Noise Element Policy N 16.3 vibration standards were used in the noise study to analyze construction vibration. Policy N 16.3 identifies a motion velocity perception threshold for vibration due to passing trains of 0.01 inches per second (in/sec) over the range of one to 100 Hz. Therefore, Riverside County identifies a vibration perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec. The Riverside County vibration standard was used in the analysis of project -generated construction vibration to assess the human perception of vibration levels. City of La Quinta General Plan The City of La Quinta adopted an Environmental Hazards Element (Chapter IV) of the General Plan (LQGP), which includes policies related to Noise, in February 2013. Chapter IV identifies areas where noise levels are expected to reach unacceptable levels for specified land uses as the City and surrounding lands continue to build out. It provides policies and programs which will assure that proposed development is compatible with the ambient noise levels of surrounding lands and uses. To Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-3 October 2023 545 4.12 NOISE minimize noise impacts to noise -sensitive land uses, the Element includes Policy N-1.1, which provides that "Noise standards in the City shall be consistent with the Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility scale described in this Element" (Table 4.12-1). As is reflected in Table 4.12-1, for single family dwellings and duplexes, a CNEL of greater than 70 and below 75 dba is normally unacceptable and new construction is discouraged, but if construction does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and need noise insulation features included in the design. Policy N-1.2 requires a noise study and any necessary mitigation measures for new developments along roadways where the noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL. Table 4.12-1 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Land U:�cs CNEL d6A J 5o 55 6D 05 70 75 $o Resldlenilal - Single Family Dwalljrigs, bluple,g. Mlohlle Fioraes I: asx1entlal - Mu tple Fan1ll+ ffidi TransGent LodgFnip, Hotels and P&telg kliod ilassrc ums, Llbrarics, tiF urchcsr Iiaspttah, Nursing 14&rh&L alld Convalescent HospltaFs ALAktorlums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters �P-;3-ft Amw F. QUt d"r- $pqg-.G1;a#4r 5pc 1"5 I'taygrounds, Malghborha d Parks :olf Co ir-ses, Rldlog 57ables, Water Racrfio[ion, Urnatories -aN9tc $ulldimw13b3bres34 cot"Met-dal and ProfeEsianal Indushiatr ManandAnJr , tJVIRIes. Agrrtulture sarimA; wriN mo QOAorlmerrl Of Nedrlill! 5lrrwJCL-, "GufuelincF f'Qr 04r Frwepprptrpn 000 Carh[ent of 1heJV&ke ElerrlerA of I to Cerlefaf F6 r," ig go W-M kyAcceptablru With nn specialnolcereduckim requirements u5s%imIngelarldzwd rlJm[ 1N4. CnnditicnaiRp Acceptabke: NL-w ccmytmKtronordrvekopmfril should he under[pkenanlyafLer J d Lui4ud alYalysis Of tan, nols2 fN]ucuoil rcqulr2nLeAt IS ntMtan0 nCe*M noise InsuldGOq fr7 liron 1hrikid9rl In fine f LL111JJF"rmarlr Vin xceoable; NewcansMKNm Isdlsmuraged, ifrww cons*F wtiandoespravEed,a ekuird &LAFj5a of khe rod]me redkivl re+guiremerib muymhdo l be e rued reded Ilbdr Insulallon faaturos Indudad In tklra daFln_ 0Ckewky Unncceplahle= Mekv conrstroctlon ordevelnpmenk atiauldgenrrally not he u mkil ken. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-4 October 2023 546 4.12 NOISE The noise criteria identified in the City of La Quinta Noise Element are performance standards against which potential future impacts are to be evaluated, and include land use compatibility with transportation noise. The City uses the compatibility criteria to gauge the compatibility of land uses relative to existing and future exterior noise levels. The Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments is illustrated in Table 4.12-1. Noise - sensitive land uses, such as single-family residential, are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 60 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable with noise levels below 70 dBA CNEL. Hotel land uses are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 65 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 70 dBA CNEL. CEQA requires an analysis of project impacts to the environment and does not require an analysis of impacts to the project. Although not required to be analyzed pursuant to CEQA, based on the City of La Quinta land use compatibility guidelines and Policy N-1.2, the Project -specific Noise Study was prepared to determine whether Project exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL for residential uses can be achieved. The Noise Study also identified a conditionally acceptable exterior noise level of 70 dBA CNEL for hotel land uses, and an interior noise level of less than 45 dBA CNEL for both residential and hotel land uses. This information is also provided to demonstrate the Project's onsite traffic noise consistency with Policy N-1.2, Table 4.12-1 (Table IV-3 in the LQGP) above, and the State CBC. La Quinta Municipal Code The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) established standards to regulate noise associated with construction and operational activities. To control noise impacts associated with construction, the City established limits to the hours of operation. These are summarized in Table 4.12-2, Construction Hours, below. Table 4.12-2 Construction Hours LQMC Permitted Hours of Construction Activity Construction Noise Section Level Standards October 1st to April 30th May 1st to September 30th 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 6.08.050 Mondays to Fridays Mondays to Fridays n/a All Year: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays; no activity Sundays & holidays Section 9.100.210 of the LQMC implements General Plan Policy N-1.1, discussed above, by establishing noise standards from operational activities. The noise control standards set out in Section 9.100.210 apply to noise sensitive land uses, which include residential property, schools, hospitals, and churches, regardless of the land use district in which these uses are located. Section 9.100.210 also outlines the land use compatibility for community noise environments (as displayed in Table 4.12-1, above). Exterior noise standards are also established in Section 9.100.210 and indicated in Table 4.12-3, below. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-5 October 2023 547 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-3 Exterior Noise Standards Receiving Land Use Noise Standard Time Period Noise Sensitive 65 dB(A) 7:00 a.m. —10:00 p.m. 50 dB(A) 10:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. Other Nonresidential 75 dB(A) 7:00 a.m. —10:00 p.m. 65 dB(A) 10:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. 4.12.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The State CEQA Guidelines' Appendix G Environmental Checklist, recommends the following thresholds of significance for analyzing project noise impacts. a. Would the project result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Would the project result in the generation of excessive ground -borne vibration or ground - borne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Methodology Noise Fundamentals Noise is simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A -weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise sources and are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. Table 4.12-4, Typical Noise Levels, presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective loudness and effects. Range of Noise Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the logarithmic scale (based on multiples of 10) is frequently used to measure intensity, while the scale for measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels represents a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. As shown in Table 4.12- Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-6 October 2023 548 4.12 NOISE 4 (below), the most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud) with a normal conversation at three feet being roughly 60 dBA. By comparison, jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA at approximately 100 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. Another important aspect of noise is the duration of the sound and the way it is described and distributed in time. Table 4.12-4 Typical Noise Levels ftsurm MMDOOIR COMMUNMDOtw A - rM"r SMIffe"VE EFFECTS Of ACM01Ps Mo`+' ffi" "VM ill M IkGUS Norst TH�S<IOrp 4F iyLTN LS¢ M,kq NET 1MOME S34 InP F we •JET *LY-OVER AT 3MM f ID30iq 0AW6 140 Up-Q rA+JT-Qnomrn VK - Mi LA" MK WE 9 AT I ra 0 fl) A* 5f�R7 N015Y E]MV&TWEKATISmLSD Ma rtMkMJ%rMaw F004 gLGW DER ATvii,C3fq� M%V MM W M AREA. DAV'HMS YACUUM {L ,%Ii*R AT Bip f,19 tU M _ ir.:::ihl l_r17: rG1 titi: 46 MAW rAAFFIC AT Wm MO tl� N00M91L SAF..-KH iT 1 n r34tJ QLGET LRRRM CLAYME 7, -Wit 0k AN*5,r R"41PG I ART Li ►1 r4f�lerRrEf TkRAnE, LAVYL CONFEREACE RazuiBaC-4GPOU4[} QUIET SUNUHAil NPGf1 MM7F LEoP-&Mv 34 � IrET+�u#�IL'art�hfCrlF+ !fDRO13M Al NJC3Hr,c0Pau Fer idif] HALL {ELAiKG*Dl� W IFFE3CT' RRBw.G�x3TjYaEC814GINiE ;� r L8W6T nW561 ►0 8f HLIMAIr 4tFIY fF.IM1 8i i#T THfi� if5ih fjf H�}GdkM MEARING FW MIFIS Source: Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Exhibit 2-A, Urban Crossroads, August 2021 (Appendix M.1) Noise Descriptors Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous noise levels. The most commonly used figure is the equivalent sound level (Leq). Leq is not measured directly; it is calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in dBA. Leq represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period and is commonly used to describe the "average" noise levels within the environment. Peak hour or average noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour may be disturbing if they occur during evening hours (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) and nighttime (sleeping) hours (10 p.m. and 7 a.m.). To account for this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite 24-hour noise level, was developed. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard at any time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. The City relies on the 24-hour CNEL level to assess land use compatibility. Vibration Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-7 October 2023 549 4.12 NOISE Per the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment, vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. Sources of ground -borne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or human -made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment) and may be described by amplitude and frequency. There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. PPV is most frequently used to describe vibration impacts to buildings. Noise Impact Analysis The Project -specific Noise Impact Analysis (herein referred to as "Noise Study") determined the noise exposure and the necessary noise mitigation for the development of the proposed Project. Project grading will take place in two phases. Grading Phase A will grade the southern half of the Project, while grading Phase B will grade the northern half of the Project. Rock crushing activities are proposed during grading of the site. Development of the Project site is proposed in four phases indicated as Phases: 1A, 113, 2, and 3. The development phases are described below. • Phase 1A encompasses the southern portion of the Project site and will include Planning Areas 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15A, 19, and 20. Phase 1A consists of open space areas, low density residential land uses, and the resort/golf land use. • Phase 1B encompasses the area north of Phase 1A and will include Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 15A, and 18. Phase 113 will develop low and medium density residential units and open space areas. • Phase 2 includes Planning Area 4, 6, and 16, consisting of low and medium density residential. • Phase 3 includes Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, and 17, consisting of open space, resort, and residential (low and medium density) land uses. In order to determine Project -related construction noise impacts, the Noise Study evaluated construction of the Project in the grading and development phases described above. The Noise Study also evaluated at a programmatic level the construction of the off -site utility field, including the construction of the five well sites and 2.5-acre substation. The substation is anticipated to be constructed during development of Phase 1A. To assess the off -site transportation CNEL noise level impacts associated with operation of the proposed Project, noise contours were developed based on the Project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis, also prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix M.1). Significance Criteria The Noise Study utilized various resources to determine significance criteria for Project -related construction and operational activities. These resources are discussed below. Noise -Sensitive Receivers Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-8 October 2023 550 4.12 NOISE Per the Noise Study, Project -related noise level increases were evaluated at the closest sensitive receiver locations. Under CEQA principles and prevailing noise modeling standards, consideration should be given to the magnitude of the increase, the existing ambient noise levels, and the location of noise -sensitive receivers to determine if a noise increase represents a significant adverse environmental impact. An important way of determining a person's subjective reaction to a new noise is to compare it to the existing environment to which one has adapted — the so-called "ambient" environment. Substantial Permanent Noise Level Increases In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will typically be judged. The Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) developed guidance that consider the ambient noise level and Project -generated noise level increases. For example, if the ambient noise environment is quiet (<60 dBA) and the new noise source greatly increases the noise levels, an impact may occur if the noise criteria is exceeded. Therefore, FICON identifies a readily perceptible 5 dBA or greater project -related noise level increase as a significant impact. Per FICON, in areas where the "without project" noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA, a 3 dBA barely perceptible noise level increase appears to be appropriate for most people. When the "without project" noise level increase already exceeds 65 dBA, any increase in community noise louder than 1.5 dBA or greater is considered a significant impact, since it likely contributes to an existing noise exposure exceedance. See Table 4.12-5. Table 4.12-5 Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receivers Without Project Noise Level Potential Significant Impact <60dBA 5dBA ormore 60 - 65 dBA 3 dBA or more > 65 dBA 1.5 dBA or more Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON), 1992. The analysis of Project -generated noise level increases during operation is conservative because as the background ambient and cumulative noise volumes increase due to growth in the Project vicinity, the Project's incremental contribution to ambient noise will diminish over time. Substantial Temporary or Periodic Noise Level Increases Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol's 12 dBA Leq substantial noise level increase threshold was used to assess temporary noise level increases. If the Project -related construction noise levels generate a temporary noise level increase above the existing ambient noise levels of up to 12 dBA Leq, then the Project construction noise level increases will be considered a potentially significant impact. Although the Caltrans recommendations were specifically developed to assess traffic noise impacts, the 12 dBA Leq substantial noise level increase threshold is used in California to address noise level increases with the potential to exceed existing conditions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-9 October 2023 551 4.12 NOISE Construction Noise Level Compliance Threshold To evaluate whether the Project will generate potentially significant temporary construction noise levels at off -site sensitive receiver locations, a construction -related noise level threshold adopted from the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual is applied. Project construction noise criteria should account for the existing noise environment, the absolute noise levels during construction activities, the duration of the construction, and adjacent land use. Due to the lack of standardized construction noise thresholds, the FTA provides guidelines that can be considered reasonable criteria for construction noise assessment. The FTA considers a daytime exterior construction noise level of 80 dBA Leq as a reasonable threshold for noise sensitive residential uses. Construction Vibration Standards The Noise Study analyzed Project generated groundborne vibration and groundborne noise in order to determine whether impacts would be significant. The ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized in Table 4.12-6, below. Table 4.12-6 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet Small Bulldozer 0.003 Jackhammer 0.035 Loaded Truck 0.076 Large Bulldozer 0.089 Hoe Ram (Breaker) 0.089 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Table 10-11, Urban Crossroads, August 2021. As noted above, the City does not provide construction vibration level standards; therefore, the Noise Study utilized the County of Riverside General Plan Noise Element Policy N 16.3 vibration standards to establish a threshold. Policy N 16.3 identifies a motion velocity perception threshold for vibration due to passing trains of 0.01 inches per second (in/sec) over the range of one to 100 Hz. For the purposes of this analysis, the perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec shall be used to assess the potential impacts due to the Project construction at nearby sensitive receiver locations. Significance Criteria Summary The significance criteria utilized in the Noise Study and this analysis are summarized in Table 4.12-7. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-10 October 2023 552 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-7 Significance Criteria Summary Analysis Receiving Land Use Conditions) Significance Criteria Daytime I Nighttime Off -Site Traffic Noise Noise- Sensitivet If ambient is < 60 dBA CNEL >_ 5 dBA CNEL Project increase If ambient is 60— 65 dBA CNEL >_ 3 dBA CNEL Project increase If ambient is > 65 dBA CNEL >_ 1.5 dBA CNEL Project increase Non -Noise Sensitive If ambient is < 70 dBA CNEL >_ 5 dBA CNEL Project Increase If ambient is > 70 dBA CNEL >_ 3 dBA CNEL Project Increase On -Site Traffic Noise Noise- Sensitive Exterior Noise Level Criteria 65 dBA CNEL Interior Noise Level Standard 45 dBA CNEL Construction Noise- Sensitive October 1st to April 30th; 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; Mondays to FridayS4 May 1st to September 30th; 6 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Mondays to FridayS4 All Year: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays; no activity Sundays and holidays Exterior Noise Level Thresholds 80 dBA Leq n/a Noise Level Increase 12 dBA Leq n/a Vibration Level Thresholds 0.01 in/sec RMS n/a 'Source: FICON, 1992. Z Sources: City of La Quinta General Plan Noise Element Table IV-3. ' Sources: City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Ordinance 550, Section 9.100.210 (B) and GP Policy N-1.2. 4 Sources: City of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 6.08.050 (Appendix 3.1). 'Sources: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. 'Threshold based on the substantial increase criteria in the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, May 2011. 'County of Riverside General Plan Noise Element, Policy 16.3. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.; "n/a" = No nighttime construction activity is permitted, so no nighttime construction noise level limits are identified; "RMS" = root -mean -square As is further discussed in the Project impact analysis, Project -generated noise during operation is consistent with the City Noise Ordinance 550, Section 9.100.210 (B) and General Plan Policy N-1.2, which identify absolute noise limits for interior and exterior noise. However, consistent with CEQA principles and prevailing noise modeling standards, the EIR and Noise Study also consider the magnitude of the increase, the existing ambient noise levels, and the location of noise -sensitive receivers to determine if a noise increase represents a significant adverse environmental impact. Existing Noise Level Measurements As discussed in Section 4.12.2 in this Noise section, eight, 24-hour noise level measurements were collected at sensitive receiver locations near the Project on Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 to assess the existing noise level environment (Exhibit 4.12-1, Noise Measurement Locations). The noise measurements presented in the Noise Study focus on the average or equivalent sound levels (Leq). Table 4.12-8 identifies the hourly daytime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) noise levels at each noise level measurement location shown in Exhibit 4.12-1. Table 4.12-7 provides the (energy average) noise levels used to describe the daytime and nighttime ambient conditions. The background ambient noise levels in the Project study area are dominated by the transportation -related noise associated with the arterial roadway network. The 24-hour existing noise level measurements shown in Table 4.12-8, present the existing ambient noise conditions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-11 October 2023 553 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-8 24-Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements Energy Average Noise Location' Description Level (dBA Le,)2 CNEL Daytime Nighttime Located on Quarry Ranch Road north of the project site L1 59.8 49.1 60.5 near existing residential homes. Located on Avenue 58 north of the project site near L2 existing residential homes. 57.7 55.9 62.8 Located south of Avenue 58 on Madison Street northeast L3 of the project site near existing residential homes. 54.8 53.2 60.1 Located on Avenue 60 east of the project site near L4 55.6 52.8 60.2 existing residential homes. Located east of the project site on Monroe Street near L5 42.9 42.2 49.0 existing residential homes south of Avenue 62. Located east of the project site on Monroe Street near L6 50.0 43.0 51.8 and existing park, north of Avenue 64. Located near Avenue 62 east of the project site near L7 49.8 48.2 55.2 existing residential homes. Located on Avenue 60 west of Madison Street near L8 existing residential homes and future residential use. 53.2 53.9 60.4 1 See Exhibit 4.12-1 for the noise level measurement locations. Z Energy (logarithmic) average levels. The long-term 24-hour measurement worksheets are included in Appendix 5.2 of Noise Study. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Noise Measurement Locations Receivers represent the location of noise sensitive areas and are used to estimate the future noise level impacts. Collecting reference ambient noise level measurements at the nearby sensitive receiver locations allows for a comparison of the before and after Project noise levels and is necessary to assess potential noise impacts due to the Project's contribution to the ambient noise. Six receiver locations in the vicinity of the Project site were identified. All distances are measured from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., private backyards) or at the building fagade of the receiver locations, whichever is closer to the Project site. As demonstrated in Exhibit 4.12-2, the offsite Project receivers are indicated as R1 through R6. 24-hour noise level measurements were taken near each of the locations (at the closest "L" location listed in Table 4.12-8, above) to describe the existing ambient noise environment. R1: Located approximately 4,517 feet north of the Project site, R1 represents existing residential homes on Quarry Ranch Road. R2: Location R2 represents existing residential homes located approximately 6,872 feet north of the Project site on Avenue 58. R3: Location R3 represents the existing residential homes located roughly 6,951 feet northeast of the Project site at the southeast corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58. R4: Location R4 represents the existing residential homes located roughly 2,178 feet northeast of the Project site. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-12 October 2023 554 4.12 NOISE R5: Location R5 represents the existing residential community east of the Project site at roughly 1,268 feet. R6: Location R6 represents the existing residential home and agricultural use located approximately 3,071 feet east of the Project site. The nearest receptor where an individual can stay for a 24-hour period is represented by R5 at approximately 1,268 feet east of the Project boundary. Other sensitive land uses in the Project study area that are located at greater distances than those identified in the noise study will experience lower noise levels due to the additional attenuation from distance and the shielding of intervening structures. Distance is measured in a straight line from the Project boundary to each receiver location. Exhibit 4.12-2 displays the receiver locations used in the Noise Study and explained below. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-13 October 2023 555 � •1 .. { ti � -. � •r - . L � } r ins: : 1 a �• L +Y ' f • ;�i dr r +'jy r. ■ ,�• � `'. .. f115 em: '4VJ•iA emu[ * : -• � � • Tii I f Ysn J l y : y'�• 1 • �s Y O � 1 � •��,�8• — $ C 1 rq&f IS iN ' la'ti�5 � •C�kdr M - ' . YT ■ C4N914 8fi SHo I � A� 1 GEE M N. $5Mimg G avq Milt E.?rriej f e�tlwi!� ULMNiOra Mll Exisl 4 20-poa R 9efm —40 DjiUnee ffaM rt� to Pfojea Mle boundary In feu Source: Noise Study, Urban Crossroads, Inc. 1 ONSUL.TIN INC.NOISE SOURCE AND RECEIVER LOCATIONS �,::r.fllJ a- ivi. FUC-IIdUFL' Q'5:4Abd122 l.l9' o;'p{:�, TRAVEF J NE EXHIBIT 2-2 4.12 NOISE Future Off -Site Traffic Noise Environment The estimated roadway noise impacts from future vehicular traffic were calculated using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA-RD-77-108. Details of the modeling procedures are provided in Appendix L.1. Consistent with the Project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis, the Noise Study provides off -site roadway segment analysis for the models described above under Section 6.2 (Off -Site Traffic Noise Prediction Model Inputs) of the Noise Study. The off -site roadway segments for the traffic scenarios include: 1. Existing Conditions 2. Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects with Project buildout (Phase 3) 3. Phase 3 (2031) without Project 4. Phase 3 (2031) with Project 5. Year 2040 (General Plan Buildout) Conditions without Madison Street extension (GPA) and with Jefferson Street connection to Avenue 58. This includes: a. Termination of Madison Street as a General Plan roadway, south of Avenue 60 b. Future Jefferson Street connection from Avenue 58 to Avenue 62 c. Emergency vehicle access (EVA) is provided via Madison Street, from the northerly boundary of the Project's Planning Area 18 to Avenue 60. Table 4.12-9, Off -Site Roadway Parameters, identifies the 11 study area roadway segments, the distance from the centerline to the adjacent land use based on the functional roadway classifications per the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, and the posted vehicle speeds. The average existing and future daily traffic (ADT) volumes used for this study are presented on Table 4.12-10, Average Daily Traffic Volumes. Table 4.12-11 provides the time of day (daytime, evening, and nighttime) vehicle splits, and Table 4.12-12 presents the traffic flow distributions (vehicle mix) used for this analysis. The vehicle mix provides the hourly distribution percentages of automobile, medium trucks, and heavy trucks for input into the FHWA noise prediction model. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-15 October 2023 557 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-9 Off -Site Roadway Parameters ID Roadway Segment Receiving Land Use' Classification Distance From Centerline To Nearest Land Use (Feet)2 Vehicle Speed (mph) 1 Av. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC Secondary Arterial 44' 50 2 Av. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC Secondary Arterial 44' 50 3 Av. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A Secondary 50' 50 4 Madison St. s/o Av. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR Primary Arterial 43' 55 5 Av. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A Arterial 64' 55 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR Modified Secondary 42' 50 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A Secondary 50' 50 8 Monroe St. s/o Av. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS Secondary Arterial 44' 50 9 Monroe St. s/o Av. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR Primary Arterial 43' 55 10 Monroe St. s/o Av. 56 GC/LDR/OS Primary Arterial 43' 55 11 Jackson St. s/o Airport BI. A/RR Arterial 64' 55 City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit II-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. z Centerline Distance to Receiving Land Use based upon the right-of-way distances for each roadway classification provided in the General Plan Circulation Element. "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; "A"= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"= Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities Table 4.12-10 Average Daily Traffic Volumes ID Roadway Segment Average Daily Traffic Volumes" Existing Phase 3 (2031) 2040 Without Project With Project Without Project With Project Existing GPz With GPA3 1 Av. 58 w/o Madison St. 1,600 7,300 6,000 11,600 12,000 12,500 2 Av. 58 w/o Monroe St. 2,300 4,000 8,100 9,800 10,200 14,000 3 Av. 58 w/o Jackson St. 1,800 3,000 7,700 8,900 18,600 19,000 4 Madison St. s/o Av. 56 6,700 10,100 20,500 23,900 35,600 34,000 5 Av. 60 w/o Jackson St. 1,200 1,800 6,100 6,700 12,000 15,000 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. 600 6,300 1,800 7,500 9,600 13,000 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. 11700 4,000 6,700 9,000 19,800 19,000 8 Monroe St. s/o Av. 60 1,600 5,000 8,200 11,600 19,000 25,000 9 Monroe St. s/o Av. 58 2,700 5,500 12,100 14,900 26,000 27,000 10 Monroe St. s/o Av. 56 3,400 6,800 12,500 15,900 25,000 26,000 11 Jackson St. s/o Airport BI. 2,400 3,500 10,400 11,500 28,400 29,000 Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-16 October 2023 558 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-11 Time of Day Vehicle Splits Vehicle Type Time of Day Splits' Total of Time of Day Splits Daytime Evening Nighttime Autos 75.55% 13.96% 10.49% 100.00% Medium Trucks 1 48.91% 2.17% 48.91% 100.00% Heavy Trucks 47.30% 5.41% 47.30% 100.00% ' Source: Typical Southern California vehicle mix. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; "Evening" = 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Table 4.12-12 Distribution of Traffic Flow by Vehicle Type (Vehicle Mix) Classification Total %Traffic Flow Total Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks All Roadways' 97.42% 1.84% 0.74% 100.00% ' County of Riverside Office of Industrial Hygiene Requirements for Determining and Mitigating Traffic Noise Impacts to Residential Structures. Future On -Site Traffic Noise Environment The on -site roadway parameters, including the ADT volumes used for the Noise Study are presented in Table 4.12-13, below. To predict the future on -site noise environment at the Project site, parameters including the number of lanes and daily volume thresholds were obtained from the Project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis. The exterior noise level impacts were placed five feet above the finished floor elevation at the outdoor living areas and proposed building facades. Second -floor receivers were located 14 feet above the finished floor elevation. Table 4.12-13 On -Site Roadway Parameters Roadway Lanes Classification' Average Daily' Traffic Volume Speed Limit (mph )2 Site Conditions Jefferson Street 2 Secondary Arterial 5,600 45 Soft North Loop 2 Secondary Arterial 2,000 45 Soft South Loop 2 Collector 1 2,700 1 45 1 Soft ' Source: The Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis General Plan Buildout (2040) Project Impacts a. Generation of substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies Most Project development will occur on lands that are physically removed and isolated from existing and reasonably foreseeable future development by the existing CVWD groundwater recharge basins and the Dike 4 flood control levee on the east and BLM lands and drainages to the north. The Project will include the construction of an off -site utility field, including the development of up to five water Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-17 October 2023 559 4.12 NOISE wells and a 2.5-acre substation. The exact location of the off -site utility field has not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located within a 2-mile radius generally east and northeast of the of the Project site. Project -generated noise during short-term construction activities, and long-term operational activities are analyzed below. Construction The Project -specific Noise Study analyzed the potential impacts resulting from the short-term construction activities associated with the development of the Project. Noise generated by the Project construction equipment will include a combination of graders, excavators, haul trucks, compaction equipment, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that when combined can reach high levels. The number and mix of construction equipment are expected to occur in the following stages: (1) site preparation including grubbing, (2) grading and excavation, (3) building construction, (4) paving, and miscellaneous construction activities. Grading of the Project site will occur in two phases, which may overlap by approximately 6 months. This was taken into account in the Noise Study's analysis of construction noise. Exterior Noise Level at Off -Site Receiver Locations Based on the stages of construction, the noise impacts associated with the proposed Project are expected to create temporarily high noise levels at the nearby receiver locations. Receiver locations are indicated in Exhibit 4.12-2. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 68 dBA to 80 dBA when measured at 50 feet. Hard site conditions are assumed in the noise analysis which result in relatively conservative noise levels that attenuate (or decrease) at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from a point source (i.e., construction equipment). To assess the worst -case construction noise levels, the Project construction noise analysis relies on the highest noise level impacts when the equipment with the highest reference noise level is operating at the closest point from the edge of primary construction activity (Project boundary) to each of the off -site receiver locations. This is a conservative approach with the highest noise -level -producing equipment for each stage of construction operating at the perimeter of the Project to the nearby sensitive receiver locations. However, this scenario is unlikely during typical construction activities and overstates the construction noise levels that will be experienced at each receiver location. To evaluate whether the Project will generate potentially significant short-term noise levels at nearest receiver locations, a construction -related daytime noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq was used as a reasonable threshold to assess the daytime construction noise level impacts. As shown on Table 4.12- 14, when observed from the nearby off -site receiver locations, the construction noise levels are expected to range from 28.9 to 58.7 dBA Leq, with the highest levels ranging from 40.9 to 58.7 dBA Leq. The construction noise analysis shows that the nearest off -site receiver locations will satisfy the reasonable daytime 80 dBA Leq significance threshold during construction activities. Although the Project will not generate significant construction noise levels, Mitigation Measures N0I-1 through Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-18 October 2023 560 4.12 NOISE NOI-4 are set forth to minimize construction noise to the maximum extent practicable. Additionally, the City of La Quinta established construction hours of operation to lessen the impacts of construction noise within Municipal Code Section 6.08.050, as described in Table 4.12-2, Construction Standards. Therefore, the construction noise impacts will be less than significant at all off -site receiver locations. Table 4.12-14 Off -Site Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq) Receiver Locations Site Prep Grading Building Construction Paving Architectural ngral Highest Levels2 Threshold' Threshol Exceeded?' R1 38.9 40.9 33.9 31.9 28.9 40.9 80 No R2 -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 3 80 No R3 -3 -3 -3 -3 3 3 80 No R4 52.5 54.5 47.5 45.5 42.5 54.5 80 No R5 56.7 58.7 51.7 49.7 46.7 58.7 80 No R6 1 52.2 1 54.2 1 47.2 45.2 42.2 54.2 80 No ' Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A. Z Construction noise level calculations based on distance from the project site boundaries (construction activity area) to nearby receiver locations. CadnaA construction noise model inputs are included in Appendix 10.1. 3 Existing topography blocks direct exposure to this receiver location. ° Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. ' Do the estimated project construction noise levels exceed the construction noise level threshold? Rock Crushine Activities Rock crushing activities are anticipated to occur onsite during grading of the Project. No blasting is anticipated on the site. The crushed rock will be used on -site, and therefore no export activities are anticipated. The type of crusher will be a mobile unit, anticipated to consist of Sandvik QJ331, Anaconda TD516, or similar. The Noise Study utilized reference construction equipment noise levels from the Federal Highway Association's (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). Table 4.12-15 provides a summary of the reference average Leq noise level used to describe rock crushing construction activities that include a hoe ram or breaker representing a percussion hammer fitted to an excavator for breaking rock. Table 4.12-15 Rock Crushing Reference Noise Level Construction Typical Reference Noise Level @ Highest Reference Stage Equipment 50 Feet (dBA Leq)s Noise Level (dBA Leq) Rock Crushing Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 83 83 Front End Loader 75 Dump Truck 72 ' FHWA's Roadway Construction Noise Model, January 2006. Using the RCNM reference noise levels and the noise prediction model, Urban Crossroads calculated the noise levels from rock crushing activity operating the Project site boundary at each off -site receiver location. The calculations determined that rock crushing noise levels at these locations are expected to range from 44.9 to 62.7 dBA Leq, as shown on the table below. Therefore, the rock crushing activities will satisfy the reasonable daytime 80 dBA Leq significance threshold at the nearest Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-19 October 2023 561 4.12 NOISE off -site receiver locations. Noise impacts associated with on -site rock crushing will be less than significant impacts at all off -site receiver locations. Table 4.12-16 Rock Crushing Noise Level Summary Receiver Location' Rock Crushing Construction Noise Levels (dBA Ley) Noise Levels' Threshold' Threshold Exceeded?4 R 1 44.9 80 No R2 -5 80 No R3 -5 80 No R4 58.5 80 No R5 62.7 80 No R6 58.2 80 No 'Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A in Noise Study. Z Highest construction noise level operating at the Project site boundary, based on distance from the construction noise source activity to nearby receiver locations as shown on Table 10-2 in Noise Study. s Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. ° Do the estimated Project construction noise levels exceed the construction noise level threshold? 5 Existing topography blocks direct exposure to this receiver location. Temporary Noise Increases To determine whether Project construction will impact the existing ambient noise environment, the Project noise levels were combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements at the off - site receiver locations. The difference between the combined Project -construction and existing ambient noise levels are used to determine the construction noise level contributions. A temporary noise level increase of 12 dBA is considered a potentially significant impact based on Caltrans substantial noise level increase criteria. This is used to assess significance of the Project -construction noise level increases. Construction of the proposed Project would contribute unmitigated, typical construction noise level increases at nearby sensitive residences by up to 11.6 dBA Leq during the daytime hours. This is indicated in the table below. Since the highest temporary noise level increase of up to 11.6 dBA Leq during Project construction are below the 12 dBA Leq significance threshold, the unmitigated construction noise level increases are considered less than significant noise impacts. Table 4.12-17 Off -Site Construction -Related Temporary Noise Level Increases Receiver Location' Total Project Operational Noise Level' Measurement Location Reference Ambient Noise Levels' Combined Project and Ambient5 Typical Project Increase' Increase Criteria' Increase Criteria Exceeded? R1 40.9 L1 59.8 59.9 0.1 12 No R2 -3 L2 57.7 57.7 0.0 12 No R3 -3 L3 54.8 54.8 0.0 12 No R4 54.5 L8 53.2 56.9 3.7 12 No R5 58.7 L7 49.8 59.2 9.4 12 No R6 54.2 L5 42.9 54.5 11.6 12 No Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-20 October 2023 562 4.12 NOISE ' Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A. 2 Highest construction noise level operating at the Project site boundary as shown on Table 10-2. a Ambient noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A. ° Observed daytime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1. 5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the highest construction activities. 6 The temporary typical construction noise level increase expected with the addition of the highest construction activities. ' Based on the 12 dBA temporary increase significance criteria as outlined in Section 4. Off -Site Utility Field As previously stated, the Project proposes an off -site utility field within which five off -site water wells, and a 2.5-acre substation will be constructed. The Noise Study analyzed the construction noise level impacts of the offsite improvements at a programmatic level. Water Wells The off -site wells will be limited to the confined aquifer and will not be located within 1,000 feet of any existing CVWD well site. The FHWA RCNM, reference noise level measurements suggest that well drilling construction noise levels will approach 78 dBA Leq at 50 feet. Since the actual location of the off -site water well construction sites and potentially impacted nearby noise sensitive receivers are not known at this time, temporary noise barriers shall be required where well construction could result in potentially significant noise impacts to sensitive receptors. Where necessary, prior to drilling for the wells, the construction site shall provide a temporary 24-foot-high noise barrier to be used throughout the construction of the water well. The peak off -site water well construction noise levels (with the temporary 24-foot-high noise barrier) at 50 feet of the noise source (i.e., well site) are expected to satisfy the reasonable daytime exterior construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Leq during temporary Project construction activities. The development of the wells will be constructed in compliance with CVWD standards regarding their facilities. Project -level environmental review of the wells will be conducted once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. Substation The 2.5-acre substation will be located within a 2-mile radius of the Project site and constructed during development Phase 1. The actual location of the substation is not known at this time, nor whether it will be located near noise sensitive receivers. However, construction of the substation is not expected to involve drilling that would exceed the 80 dBA Leq threshold. All construction noise levels associated with substation construction are expected to satisfy the reasonable daytime exterior noise threshold during temporary substation construction activities. The development of the substation will be constructed in compliance with IID standards regarding their facilities. Project -level environmental review of the substation will be conducted once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. Operations Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-21 October 2023 563 4.12 NOISE Off -Site Traffic Noise Traffic generated by the operation of the Project will contribute to the traffic noise levels in surrounding off -site areas. To quantify the traffic noise increases on the surrounding off -site areas, changes in traffic noise levels on 11 roadway segments surrounding the Project were calculated based on the change in the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes, and associated noise contours, both of which were provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix M.1). The ADT volumes and noise contours calculations were used to determine whether the resulting noise levels would be consistent with standards set forth in Table 4.12-7. Noise contour boundaries represent the equal levels of noise exposure and are measured in CNEL from the center of the roadway. Noise contours were developed for all phases of the Project, and for General Plan buildout conditions. Existing Traffic Noise Level Contributions Existing traffic (without Project conditions) CNEL noise levels range from 60.4 to 70.3 dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the roadway centerline, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. Existing traffic noise levels are shown in the table below. Table 4.12-18 Existing Noise Contours ID Road Segment Receiving Land Use CNEL at Nearest Receiving Land Use (dBA)2 Distance to Contour from Centerline (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 1 Av. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC 63.6 RW RW 77 2 Av. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC 65.2 RW 45 98 3 Av. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A 62.5 RW RW 73 4 Madison St. s/o Av. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR 70.3 45 97 209 5 Av. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A 60.4 RW RW 68 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR 58.8 RW RW RW 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A 62.3 RW RW 71 8 Monroe St. s/o Av. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS 63.6 RW RW 77 9 Monroe St. s/o Av. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR 66.3 RW 53 114 10 Monroe St. s/o Av. 56 GC/LDR/OS 67.3 RW 62 133 11 Jackson St. I s/o Airport BI. A/RR 63.4 RW RW 108 City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit 11-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road. "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; "A"= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"=Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities. 2031 Traffic Noise Level With and Without Project Buildout As indicated in Table 4.12-19, exterior noise levels are expected to range from 63.5 to 75.2 dBA CNEL, at the nearest receiving land use, without the Project. Table 4.12-20 presents the 2031 with Project buildout traffic and growth in background traffic conditions noise level contours, which are expected to range from 67.9 to 75.8 dBA CNEL, at the nearest receiving land use. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-22 October 2023 564 4.12 NOISE Table 4.12-19 2031 Roadway Noise Contours Without Project ID Road Segment Receiving Land Use CNEL at Nearest Receiving Land Use (dBA)2 Distance to Contour from Centerline (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 1 AV. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC 69.4 RW 86 185 2 AV. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC 70.7 49 105 226 3 AV. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A 68.8 RW 90 194 4 Madison St. s/o AV. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR 75.2 95 204 440 5 AV. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A 67.5 RW 94 202 6 AV. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR 63.5 RW RW 72 7 AV. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A 68.2 RW 82 176 8 Monroe St. s/o AV. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS 70.7 49 106 228 9 Monroe St. s/o AV. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR 72.9 67 144 310 10 Monroe St. s/o AV. 56 GC/LDR/OS 73.0 68 147 316 11 Jackson St. I s/o Airport BI. A/RR 69.8 RW 133 288 'City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit 11-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. ' The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road. "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; W'= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"= Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities. Table 4.12-20 2031 Roadway Noise Contours With Project ID Road Segment Receiving Land Use CNEL at Nearest Receiving Land Use (dBA)2 Distance to Contour from Centerline (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 1 AV. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC 72.2 62 134 288 2 AV. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC 71.5 55 119 257 3 AV. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A 69.4 RW 99 213 4 Madison St. s/o AV. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR 75.8 105 226 487 5 AV. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A 67.9 RW 100 215 6 AV. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR 69.7 RW 87 187 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A 69.5 RW 100 215 8 Monroe St. s/o AV. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS 72.2 62 134 288 9 Monroe St. s/o AV. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR 73.8 77 165 356 10 Monroe St. s/o AV. 56 GC/LDR/OS 74.0 80 172 371 11 Jackson St. I s/o Airport BI. A/RR 70.2 66 143 308 City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit 11-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. Z The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road. "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; "A"= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"= Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities. 2031 Traffic Noise Level Increases With and Without Project Buildout According to the Project Noise Study, 2031 Project and background traffic will generate noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 6.2 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments, as indicated in the table below. Based on the significance criteria, the Project would result in traffic noise level increases that exceed the noise increase threshold along three roadway segments: Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-23 October 2023 565 4.12 NOISE Avenue 58 west of Madison Street (Segment #1) Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street (Segment #6) Monroe Street south of Avenue 60 (Segment #8) It should also be noted that Project -related noise along the Madison Street EVA will be less than significant since it would be utilized by emergency vehicles and the infrequent use of CVWD maintenance equipment operating on their facilities. Emergency vehicle activities are exempt from the provisions of the City of La Quinta Noise Control Ordinance (9.100.210[E]), and due to the infrequent nature of this activity, the potential emergency vehicle noise level impacts are considered less than significant. Table 4.12-21 2031 Traffic Noise Level Increases ID Road Segment Receiving Land Use Phase 3 CNEL at Receiving Land Use (dBA)' Noise Level Increase Significance Criteria' Without Project With Project Project Increase Criteria Exceeded? 1 Av. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC 69.4 72.2 2.8 1.5 Yes 2 Av. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC 70.7 71.5 0.8 1.5 No 3 Av. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A 68.8 69.4 0.6 1.5 No 4 Madison St. s/o Av. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR 75.2 75.8 0.6 1.5 No 5 Av. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A 67.5 67.9 0.4 1.5 No 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR 63.5 69.7 6.2 3.0 Yes 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A 68.2 69.5 1.3 1.5 No 8 Monroe St. s/o Av. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS 70.7 72.2 1.5 1.5 Yes 9 Monroe St. s/o Av. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR 72.9 73.8 0.9 1.5 No 10 Monroe St. s/o Av. 56 GC/LDR/OS 73.0 74.0 1.0 1.5 No 11 Jackson St. s/o Airport BI. A/RR 1 69.8 1 70.2 1 0.4 1.5 No City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit 11-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. z The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use. 3 Does the Project create an off -site transportation related noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4.12-7 in this Section and Table 4-2 in the Noise Study)? "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; "A"= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"= Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities. The three roadway segments projected to experience potentially significant noise level impacts due to Project -related traffic contributions are discussed subsequently. Avenue 58 west of Madison Street (Segment #1): This roadway segment represents the future southerly extension of South Jefferson south of Avenue 58 and west of Madison Street near The Quarry at La Quinta community and immediately south of Lake Cahuilla County Park. The noise analysis indicated that the closest noise sensitive residential receivers in The Quarry community may be impacted by future Project traffic noise from Avenue 58, without accounting for existing barrier attenuation. However, when considering the existing barrier attenuation, it appears that most of these noise sensitive residential homes benefit from an existing 6-to-8-foot-high berm/noise barrier. Consistent with the City of La Quinta Noise Element, the barrier was constructed to mitigate the future long-range General Plan Roadway network and will provide Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-24 October 2023 566 4.12 NOISE the noise attenuation needed to satisfy the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise requirements. Therefore, the Project related off -site traffic noise increases over time are considered less than significant for this segment. Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street (Segment #6): A detailed review of this roadway segment shows that the noise sensitive Trilogy La Quinta residential community is located north of Avenue 62. This segment has the highest noise level increase since it represents the primary access to the Project site. In combination with the low existing traffic volumes, this segment will likely experience a potentially significant off -site traffic noise level increase of 6.2 dBA CNEL when measured at the right-of-way of the receiving land use. However, the noise sensitive residential homes within the Trilogy community are set back approximately 300 feet from Avenue 62 behind an existing 6- to 8-foot-high masonry wall. At this distance, the exterior noise levels are estimated at 53.9 dBA CNEL and will not exceed the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise requirements. Consistent with the City of La Quinta Noise Element, the nearest noise sensitive receivers within the Trilogy La Quinta residential community located north of Avenue 62 will satisfy the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise requirements. Therefore, since the existing noise sensitive residential land use in Trilogy La Quinta residential community were developed with the appropriate exterior noise mitigation measures to satisfy long- range General Plan buildout traffic conditions and the Project traffic is included as part of the General Plan, the Project related off -site traffic noise increases over time are considered less than significant for this segment. Monroe Street south of Avenue 60 (Segment #8): A detailed review of this roadway segment shows that the noise sensitive Trilogy La Quinta residential community is located west of Monroe Street. This community was developed with the benefits of a masonry approximately 6- to 8-foot-high wall (noise barrier). Consistent with the City of La Quinta Noise Element, the existing noise barrier was constructed to mitigate the future long-range noise conditions associated with buildout of the General Plan Roadway network and will provide the noise attenuation needed to satisfy the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise requirements. Therefore, since the existing noise sensitive residential land use on Monroe Street south of Avenue 60 was developed with sufficient exterior noise mitigation measures to satisfy long-range General Plan buildout traffic noise conditions and the Project traffic is included as part of the General Plan, the Project -related off -site traffic noise increases over time are considered less than significant. Overall, the off -site traffic noise analysis recognizes that the Project would generate a noise level increase of up to 10.2 dBA CNEL on Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street (Segment #6) when measured at the property line of the receiving land use. The existing traffic noise levels on this segment are calculated at 58.8 dBA CNEL. The addition of Project (Phase 3) traffic is expected to increase the off - site traffic noise levels to 69.0 dBA CNEL resulting in a Project incremental traffic noise level increase Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-25 October 2023 567 4.12 NOISE of 10.2 dBA CNEL. According to Caltrans, a traffic impact occurs when the future noise level substantially exceeds the existing noise level. Per Caltrans, a substantial noise increase is considered to occur when the Project's predicted noise level exceeds the existing noise level by 12 dBA or more. The use of 12 dB was established in California many years ago and is based on the concept that a 10 dB increase generally is perceived as a doubling of loudness. While the relative incremental increase due to the off -site Project traffic noise on Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street (Segment #6) may be considered a doubling of the existing traffic noise levels, it does not exceed the Caltrans 12 dB substantial noise level increase threshold. In addition, the Existing plus Project (Phase 3) condition is provided solely for informational purposes and will not occur, since the Project will not be fully developed and occupied under Existing conditions. The noise levels presented in this analysis are intended to describe the off -site traffic noise levels at the boundary of the roadway segment right-of- way and the property line of the receiving land use and in many cases, this does not represent the backyard of the nearest noise sensitive receivers. On -Site Traffic Noise The Project noise study also modeled future onsite exterior noise to calculate the traffic noise, identify sensitive receptors within the Project and calculate long-term noise exposure. The noise analysis also identifies potential noise abatement measures where future impacts warrant. Exterior noise levels are typically considered at outdoor living areas of frequent human use (e.g., backyards, patio areas). Interior noise levels are evaluated at the first and second floor building fagade. Project -related noise levels are considered significant if the on -site exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL at the outdoor areas of residences or common outdoor gathering areas at hotel uses. By City ordinance, interior noise levels shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL for residences and the hotel building. The primary source of traffic noise affecting the Project is anticipated to be from Jefferson Street, North Loop and South Loop roadway segments. The Project will also experience some background traffic noise impacts from other internal streets and parking lots; however, as stated in the Noise Study, due to the low traffic volume and low vehicle speeds, traffic noise will not make a significant contribution to the noise environment beyond the roads right-of-way, discussed below. Exterior Noise Level Analysis Using the FHWA traffic noise prediction model, the expected future exterior noise levels for the on - site buildings were calculated. Table 4.12-22 presents a summary of future exterior noise levels for the planned residential development within the Project area for long-range General Plan Buildout (2040) conditions. The post -development on -site exterior traffic noise calculations indicate that the single-family residential development adjacent to Jefferson Street, North Loop, and South Loop will experience exterior noise levels ranging from 61.2 to 62.5 dBA CNEL and the property line. Therefore, the future on -site exterior traffic noise impacts on these residences will be less than significant, and Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-26 October 2023 568 4.12 NOISE no exterior noise abatement is needed to satisfy the City of La Quinta 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standards for the proposed land uses adjacent to Jefferson Street, North Loop, and South Loop. Table 4.12-22 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels Adjacent Receivers Unmitigated Noise Level (dBA CNEQ1 Exterior Noise Level Threshold (dBA CNEL)' Threshold Exceeded? Jefferson Street 62.0 65 No North Loop 61.2 65 No South Loop 62.5 65 No On -site traffic noise calculations included in Appendix 8.1 in Noise Study. z City of La Quinta exterior noise criteria (See Section 4 of Noise Study). Interior Noise Level Analysis To ensure that the interior noise levels comply with the City of La Quinta interior noise level standards, future noise levels were calculated at the first and second floor building facade locations. The interior noise levels are the difference between the predicted exterior noise level at the building fagade and the noise reduction of the structure. Typical building construction will provide a noise reduction of approximately 12 dBA with "windows open" and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with "windows closed". If a "windows closed" condition is required to meet the City 45- dBA CNEL noise limit the City shall require a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air conditioning). The interior noise level analysis shows that the City of La Quinta 45 dBA CNEL residential interior noise standards can be satisfied using typical building construction and windows with a standard sound transmission class (STC) rating of 27 for all lots/units. Building Department standard requirements applicable to the Project, which ensure a minimum 25 dBA reduction in interior noise levels include the following features: • Windows: All residential lots require first and second floor windows and sliding glass doors that have well -fitted, well -weather-stripped assemblies. • Doors (Non -Glass): All exterior doors shall be weather-stripped and have minimum STC rating of 25. Well -sealed perimeter gaps around the doors are essential to achieve the STC rating. • Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes/ducts/conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal. • Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be per manufacturer's specification or caulked plywood of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space. • Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system (e.g., air conditioning) or active ventilation system (e.g., fresh air supply) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Table 4.12-23 displays the interior noise levels with these standard requirements. Project buildings will require a windows -closed condition and mechanical ventilation. Per the table, future interior Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-27 October 2023 569 4.12 NOISE noise levels are expected to range from 36.2 to 37.5 dBA CNEL. Accordingly, interior noise levels within the Project will comply with the City's requirements and result in less than significant impacts. Table 4.12-23 Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Noise Required Minimum Interior Upgraded Threshold Adjacent Receivers Level Interior Estimated Windows Noise Threshold Exceeded? at Fa�adel NR2 Interior NR3 Levels Jefferson Street 62.0 17.0 25 No 37.0 45 No North Loop 61.2 1 16.2 1 25 1 No 36.2 45 No South Loop 62.5 1 17.5 1 25 1 No 37.5 45 No ' Exterior noise level at the facade with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). 2 Noise reduction required to satisfy the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard for residential uses. 3 Estimated minimum interior noise reduction with the recommended windows and standard building construction. ° Does the required interior noise reduction trigger upgraded windows with a minimum STC rating of greater than 27? ' Estimated interior noise level with minimum STC rating for all windows. "NR" = Noise Reduction Summary of Project Operational Noise Levels The Project proposes residential, resort/commercial, recreational, and open space land uses. Operation of the Project will result in uses consistent with the surrounding environment, including residential communities located north and east of the Project, and open space uses west and south of the Project. Project -related operational noise will include residential, resort, and recreational activities throughout the site, and off -site traffic. Typical noise generated from residential, resort, and recreational uses include people speaking to each other or on cell phones, kids playing, car doors opening/closing, and periodic maintenance (i.e., trash collection, landscaping, etc.). These activities do not generate substantial noise increases that are inconsistent with residential, resort, and recreational land uses. Based on Table 4.12-4, quiet suburban nighttime noise levels can hover around 30 dBA, while noisy urban area during the daytime can result in 70 dBA. However, as stated above, these are acceptable noise levels for such uses, per Table IV-3 of the La Quinta General Plan, La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) Ordinance 550, Sections 9.60.220 and 9.100.210 (B), and General Plan Policy N-1.2. Additionally, the noise level impacts will likely vary throughout the day and will be limited to the daytime and evening hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and compliant with the operational hours established by the City of La Quinta. Overall, operational activities (i.e., residential, resort, recreational) would not generate operational noise levels inconsistent with LQMC Ordinance 550, Section 9.100.210 (B) and General Plan Policy N-1.2. Impacts of Project -related operational noise will be less than significant. Noise and CVMSHCP Conservation Area Protection The 855-acre Project property is located adjacent to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains (SRSJM) Conservation Area, as designated by the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). Where the Project is located adjacent to the SRSJM Conservation Area (along the western edge), a minimum buffer of 74 feet will be incorporated between undeveloped Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-28 October 2023 570 4.12 NOISE native desert areas and private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas. Each private homeowner parcel along this western edge shall have fencing at the top of slope with Lexan panels to dampen noise to an appropriate level, which, according to the CVMSHCP Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, includes noise levels less than 75 dBA Leq hourly. Per the Lexan panel fence plan, the fencing would include a one -foot block wall, and five feet of Lexan panel fence system with metal support posts. This is required by Mitigation Measure B10-3. The fencing will include concrete masonry block and will be 6 feet in height. In addition, the Project will adhere to the City's Noise Ordinance. The Project developer shall also adhere to the CVMSHCP Conservation Area Land Use Adjacency Guidelines regarding noise, which requires the Project to incorporate setbacks, berms, and/or walls as applicable to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife pursuant to applicable rules, regulations and guidelines related to land use noise standards. This is required by Mitigation Measure BIO-31 in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, in this Draft EIR. The Project will implement Mitigation Measure 1310-3 and BIO-31 in order to reduce the effects of noise on wildlife to less than significant levels. Please refer to Section 4.4, Biological Resources, for further discussion of Project impacts to biological resources. Conclusion Project construction will result in less than significant noise impacts with the implementation of Mitigation Measures N0I-1 through N0I-4 and 1310-3 and B10-31. During Project operation, operational noise, and on- and off -site traffic noise generated by the Project will result in less than significant noise impacts. b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels The Noise Study analyzed the potential impacts of vibration created by the proposed Project. Construction activities and vehicular traffic are the primary sources of ground -borne vibration from the Project construction activities. Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground -borne vibration from Project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. The proposed Project's construction activities most likely to cause vibration impacts are: • Heavy construction equipment: Although all heavy mobile construction equipment has the potential of causing at least some perceptible vibration while operating close to buildings, the vibration is usually short-term and is not of sufficient magnitude to cause building damage. • Trucks: Trucks hauling building materials to construction sites can be sources of vibration intrusion if the haul routes pass through residential neighborhoods on streets with bumps or potholes. Repairing the bumps and potholes generally eliminates the problem. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-29 October 2023 571 4.12 NOISE Ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized on Table 4.12-6. In order to determine the impacts of Project -related vibration, Riverside County General Plan Noise Element Policy N 16.3 vibration standards were used to determine the thresholds of significance, since the City of La Quinta does not identify specific construction vibration level standards. Policy N 16.3 identifies a motion velocity perception threshold for vibration due to passing trains of 0.01 inches per second (in/sec) over the range of 1 to 100 Hertz (Hz). For the purposes of the analysis, the perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec was used to assess the potential impacts due to Project construction at nearby sensitive receiver locations. As it relates to human perception of vibration, at distances ranging from 1,268 to 6,951 feet from Project construction activities, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.0000 to 0.0002 in/sec RMS and will remain below the threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS at all receiver locations, as shown in Table 4.12-24. The analysis shows that at 90 feet from the construction vibration source activities, receivers would experience vibration velocity level of 0.0093 in/sec RMS. Therefore, projected construction -related vibration levels will be less than significant for all receiver locations, since receivers are located more than 90 feet from construction equipment. Therefore, the vibration impacts to human beings are considered less than significant. Table 4.12-24 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Receiver' Distance to Const. Activity (Feet) Receiver RMS Levels (in/sec)2 Threshold Exceeded?' Small Bulldozer Jack- hammer Loaded Trucks Large Bulldozer Hoe Ram4 Peak Vibration R1 4,517' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 No R2 1 6,872' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 No R3 6,951' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 No R4 2,178' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 No R5 1,268' 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 No R6 3,071' 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 No ' Receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 9-A. Z Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment included on Table 9-7. Vibration levels in PPV are converted to RMS velocity using a 0.71 conversion factor identified in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020. s Does the peak vibration exceed the maximum acceptable vibration threshold shown on Table 4-2? ° Hoe Ram (breaker) is used to evaluate noise from rock crushing onsite. Additionally, onsite construction will be restricted to daytime hours consistent with the City requirements thereby eliminating potential vibration impacts during the sensitive nighttime hours. The Project is not anticipated to significantly impact onsite residents and residential structures since building standards for seismic activity in the area exceed potential impacts from ground vibration during construction activity. Therefore, the generation of groundborne vibration and groundborne noise by Project construction activities are anticipated to be less than significant. Ground -borne vibration levels from construction and post -development vehicle traffic are generally overshadowed by vibration generated by heavy trucks that roll over the same uneven roadway surfaces. However, due to the rapid drop-off rate of ground -borne vibration and the short duration Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-30 October 2023 572 4.12 NOISE of the associated vehicles, vehicular traffic -induced ground -borne vibration is rarely perceptible beyond the roadway right-of-way, and rarely results in vibration levels that cause damage to adjacent buildings. Moreover, the Project does not propose land uses that would generate significant levels of ground vibration. The operation of the proposed residential homes, resort and recreational facilities, and open space areas do not include activities and large equipment that result in ground vibration. c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels The Project is located approximately 19 miles southeast of Palm Springs International Airport, and five miles west of Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport. Therefore, the Project is not located within two miles of a public airport or the vicinity of a private airstrip, and no impact related to the exposure of people residing or working in the Project area to excessive airport -related noise is expected. 4.12.5 Cumulative Impacts Buildout of the City of La Quinta would result in an increase of traffic throughout the City. The full range of community activities, including use of noise -generating equipment such as HVAC systems, landscape maintenance equipment and comparable on -going sources of community noise contribute to the community noise environment. These potentially significant cumulative impacts were evaluated in the City's General Plan EIR and are discussed subsequently. Construction Buildout of the City pursuant to the La Quinta General Plan would result in construction -related noise over the next several decades, which will result in on -going and distributed construction -related ambient noise. Construction activities associated with General Plan buildout will not occur at once, but will be distributed over many years. Such impacts are also intermittent, short-term and end with completion of construction. Construction -related ground -borne vibration would lead to a small increase in vibrations, however, it would not create vibrations large enough to impact surrounding uses. Future developments (including the proposed Project) would be required to comply with La Quinta Municipal Code Section 6.08.050, which establishes hours of operation for construction activities to lessen the impacts of construction noise. Additional mitigation commonly applied to construction activities includes the proper maintenance of construction equipment, as well as the placement of construction trailers and staging areas from sensitive receivers (dependent on the location of development), which would reduce noise experienced by receivers to less than significant levels. Cumulative impacts from construction would be less than significant and would occur only during the permitted hours of construction, and would stop once construction was complete. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-31 October 2023 573 4.12 NOISE Off -Site Transportation Noise Year 2040 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions A cumulative traffic noise impact occurs when the noise level would exceed the applicable standard and result in a substantial noise level increase. As discussed above, the Project's contribution to the future noise level on the area roadways is determined by comparing future noise conditions without and with the proposed Project. Project -related traffic noise would result in significant noise increases at Project buildout (2031) at Segment #6, Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street, due to the increase in traffic volume along this segment. In addition to Project buildout conditions (2031), the Noise Study analyzed Year 2040 Conditions. Consistent with the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, the Year 2040 Condition assumes the termination of Madison Street as a General Plan roadway south of Avenue 60; future Jefferson Street connection from Avenue 58 to Avenue 62; and an emergency vehicle access (EVA)via Madison Street, from the northerly boundary of the Project's Planning Area 18 to Avenue 60. The Year 2040 Condition also assumes buildout of the City consistent with the LQGP, and thus, provides a cumulative noise analysis. Per the Noise Study, the 2040 Condition ambient noise with the Project will range from 71.4 to 77.3 dBA CNEL. This is indicated in the table below. Table 4.12-25 Noise Level Without Project 2031, With Project 2031, and Year 2040 Conditions ID Road Segment Receiving Land Use' CNEL at Nearest Receiving Land Use (dBA)2 Without Project 2031 With Project 2031 Year 2040 1 Av. 58 w/o Madison St. LDR/MHDR/OS/GC 69.4 72.2 72.6 2 Av. 58 w/o Monroe St. LDR/OS/GC 70.7 71.5 73.1 3 Av. 58 w/o Jackson St. RR/MHDR/A 68.8 69.4 72.7 4 Madison St. s/o Av. 56 LDR/OS/MHDR 75.2 75.8 77.3 5 Av. 60 w/o Jackson St. MDR/CR/A 67.5 67.9 71.4 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. OS/MCF/MHDR 63.5 69.7 72.1 7 Av. 62 w/o Jackson St. TL/A 68.2 69.5 72.7 8 Monroe St. s/o Av. 60 LDR/MHDR/OS 70.7 72.2 75.6 9 Monroe St. s/o AV. 58 GC/LDR/OS/MHDR 72.9 73.8 76.3 10 Monroe St. s/o AV. 56 GC/LDR/OS 73.0 74.0 76.2 11 Jackson St. s/o Airport BI. A/RR 69.8 70.2 74.2 `City of La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit 11-1, Eastern Coachella Valley Area Plan Land Use Plan Figure 3. ' The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. Does not account for attenuation of existing 6- to 8-foot-high berm/wall/noise barrier. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road. "LDR"= Low Density Residential; "GC"= General Commercial; "OS"= Open Space; "MHDR"= Medium/High Density Residential; "A"= Agriculture; "RR"= Rural Residential; "TL"=Tribal Lands; "MCF"= Major Community Facilities. According to the La Quinta General Plan, the increased likelihood of more automobiles, trucks, and buses as a result of the implementation of the General Plan will result in an increase in noise levels along roadways throughout the City. As discussed above, pursuant to the City's Noise ordinance, sensitive land uses may experience a maximum noise level of 65 dBA CNEL. As shown in Table 4.12- 24 above, many of the roadway segments within the City will exceed noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL at Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-32 October 2023 574 4.12 NOISE future buildout of the City. Sensitive land uses, including residential uses, back up to many of these roads, and may potentially experience noise levels beyond the noise standards. Within the Project study area, residences and other sensitive uses along Madison Street south of Avenue 56 and Monroe Street south of Avenue 60, Avenue 58 and Avenue 56, will experience ambient noise levels in excess of 75 dba CNEL, which is deemed unacceptable under the City noise ordinance and General Plan. Accordingly, anticipated growth in the City would result in a cumulative noise impact. However, as shown in Table 4.12-24, the Project's contribution to the cumulative noise increase is not cumulatively considerable under the applicable significance thresholds. Moreover, and pursuant to the General Plan and the City noise ordinance, future development that contributes to an exceedance of City exterior noise standards and land use compatibility guidelines will be required to undertake a detailed noise study and incorporate noise insulation features into the design. The most effective way to reduce noise is by installing a solid barrier. To reduce noise levels by 5 dBA, a vegetative barrier must be at least 15 feet high, 100 feet wide, and dense enough to completely obstruct the line -of -sight between the noise source and receiver. For a block wall to effectively decrease traffic noise levels by 5 dB, it must be high and long enough to block the view of the road. In addition, appropriate noise -compatible land use planning, such as encouraging less sensitive land uses next to highways, has been considered in the General Plan's Land Use Map. The La Quinta General Plan EIR provides mitigation measures to reduce impacts of roadway traffic noise. These measures require that the City: 1) continues to implement a planning area -wide circulation pattern that loads primary traffic onto major arterials in order to limit local roadway traffic to the greatest extent feasible; 2) evaluates and monitors noise impacts associated with the addition of new bus routes; and 3) evaluates and monitors noise impacts associated with new truck routes proposed throughout the City. On -Site Noise The California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2, and the California Building Code (CBC) establishes noise insulation standards, including the use of building materials and windows with a standard sound transmission class (STC) rating of 27. The implementation of these standards will help ensure that interior noise levels comply with the City of La Quinta's interior noise level standards of 45 dBA CNEL for residential uses. Building Department standard requirements that reduce interior noise levels in residential buildings include non -glass doors, walls, roof, and ventilation standards (see above). Implementation of the CCR and CBC standards will ensure that building windows, doors, roofs, walls, and ventilation are utilized in future developments to reduce noise observed from inside residential buildings, and will comply with La Quinta's noise standards outlined in Municipal Code 9.100.210 (discussed in 4.12.3, Regulatory Setting). This, in addition to the development of noise attenuating Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-33 October 2023 575 4.12 NOISE features, such as block walls and landscaping will reduce noise levels observed from the interior of buildings. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. 4.12.6 Mitigation Measures Construction activities that generate noise and vibration are considered to be temporary, intermittent and of short duration, and the projected construction noise will be below the City's established threshold for significance. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measures have been identified to further reduce construction noise to the maximum extent feasible: N0I-1 Grading and building plans shall require Project construction activities comply with the City of La Quinta Municipal Code requirements pertaining to construction noise. N0I-2 During all Project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receivers nearest the Project site. N0I-3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receivers nearest the Project site during all Project construction. N0I-4 The construction contractor shall limit construction haul truck deliveries to the hours permitted by the City of La Quinta. The contractor shall also design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise. N0I-5 Prior to water well drilling, the construction contractor shall provide temporary a 24-foot-high noise barrier capable of reducing noise during well construction activities to 80 dBA Leq or less. 4.12.7 Level of Impact Significance after Mitigation The implementation of Mitigation Measures N0I-1 through N0I-5 will ensure that Project -related noise generated by construction activities are reduced to a less than significant level. The Project will also implement Mitigation Measure B10-3 and BIO-31 in order to reduce the effects of noise on wildlife. B10-3 requires a minimum buffer of 74 feet between the undeveloped native desert areas and private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas. BIO-31 requires setbacks, as specified in the Specific Plan to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure 1310-3 and 13I0-31, Project -related noise levels adjacent to Conservation Areas will be reduced to less than significant levels. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-34 October 2023 576 4.12 NOISE 4.12.8 References 1. Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., April 2023. 2. Travertine Specific Plan Off -Site Traffic Noise Mitigation Measure, Urban Crossroads, Inc., December 2022. 3. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Federal Transit Administration, September 2018, available at https://www.transit.dot.Rov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research- innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no- 0123 O.pdf. 4. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, September 2013, available at https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34120/CaItrans-2013-construction- vibration-PDF?bidld=. Travertine Draft EIR 4.12-35 October 2023 577 Page intentionally blank 578 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.13 Population and Housing 4.13 Population and Housing 4.13.1 Introduction This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) describes the existing setting regarding population and housing and the potential effects associated with implementation of the Project. The consistency of the Project with current growth projections is assessed in order to determine if the Project would result in substantial population or housing growth beyond that planned through the City General Plan and regional growth plans. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on population and housing information provided by the United States Census Bureau, California State Department of Finance (DOF), Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the Riverside County General Plan, the City of La Quinta General Plan, and the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report. in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR used in this Draft EIR. 4.13.2 Existing Conditions Riverside County Sources used in the preparation are included Please see Chapter 9.0 for a list of acronyms The County of Riverside has experienced substantial growth in recent decades. In April 2000, Riverside County had a total of 1,545,387 people, which increased approximately 41.7 percent to 2,189,641 people by 2010. By January 2021, the County's population was 2,454,453 people, which is an annual population increase of approximately 0.60 percent compared to 2019's population of 2,440,124 people. In 2020, the median age of Riverside County was 31.8. In 2000, Riverside County had a total of 584,674 dwelling units, which increased to 800,707 units by 2010, and 863,784 by 2022 (as depicted in Table 4.13-1, below). This is an increase of approximately 7.9 percent and 63,077 dwelling units in two decades. According to the Department of Finance's 2022 population and housing estimates, of the 863,784 housing units in Riverside County, approximately 773,390 units were occupied with approximately 3.10 persons per household. Table 4.13.1 Riverside County Population and Dwelling Units Year Population Dwelling Units 2000 1,545,387 584,674 2010 2,189, 641 800,707 2022 2,435,525 863,784 Source: California Department of Finance, Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State 1990-2000 and 2011-2022 Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-1 October 2023 579 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING In 2020, approximately 59.7 percent of the population in Riverside County (approximately 1,454,008.4 people) were in the labor force, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. City of La Quinta According to the City of La Quinta 2022 Housing Element, the City had a population of 23,694 people in 2000, which increased by 58.1 percent, to 37,467 people in 2010. In 2018, the population increased to 40,704. Per the U.S. Census, the City of La Quinta's population was 38,181 people in July 2021. The City of La Quinta's population accounts for approximately 1.68 percent of the County's total population. The median age in the City was 45.6 in 2010 (US Census data). The most recent Census data (2020) shows the median age in the City to be 48.6, compared to the median age in Riverside County (31.8) and the Nation (38.1). Additionally, the number of jobs in 2017 in La Quinta was 16,848; an approximately 101 percent increase in jobs since 2010 (SCAG Local Profiles La Quinta). Table 4.13-2, Total Households, 2010 to 2018, shows the increase in the number of households (occupied housing units) between 2010 and 2018, according to the La Quinta General Plan Housing Element. In 2010, La Quinta had 14,820 households, which increased to 15,505 households by 2018, representing a 4.6 percent increase and about double County -wide growth in households. However, the number of households represent a lower number compared to the total dwelling units in the City due to the high vacancy rate from seasonal homeowners. Of the 15,505 occupied housing units in the City, about 71.8 percent are owner -occupied, and 28.2 percent are renter -occupied (see Table 4.13- 4). Table 4.13-2 Total Households, 2010 to 2018 Jurisdiction 2010 2018 # Increase % Increase City of La Quinta 14,820 15,505 685 4.6 Source: La Quinta General Plan 2022 Housing Element, Table 11-15. There are three basic types of housing units in the City of La Quinta, as presented in Table 4.13-3, Total Dwelling Units by Type of Structure, 2012 to 2019. The housing units include single family units, which include both detached and attached units; multifamily units, which include apartments, duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes; and mobile homes. In 2012, there were a total of 23,585 dwelling units in the City. By 2019, it is estimated that there were 24,764 dwelling units representing a 5.0 percent increase over seven years. Together, detached and attached single-family dwelling units are estimated to comprise 88 percent of all units in the City. The number of multi -family units in the City increased by 14.6 percent from 2012 to 2019, although multi -family units represent only 11.1 percent of the total housing stock. The predominant type of dwelling unit in the City of La Quinta continues to be single family. Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-2 October 2023 580 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Table 4.13-3 Total Dwelling Units by Type of Structure, 2012 to 2019 Building Type 2012 2019 Change 2012-2019 Units Percent of Total Units Percent of Total Number Percent Single -Family 18,622 79.0 19,310 78.0 688 3.7 Single Family Attached 2,387 10.1 2,476 10.0 89 3.7 Multifamily, 2-4 units 1,127 4.8 1,140 4.6 13 1.2 Multifamily, 5 or more units 1,218 5.2 1,607 6.5 389 31.9 Mobile Homes 231 1.0 231 1.0 0 0 Total Dwelling Units 23,585 100.0 24,764 100.0 1,179 5.0 Source: La Quinta General Plan 2022 Housing Element, Table 11-12 As shown in Table 4.13-4, Housing Tenure and Vacancy, shows the housing by tenure in the City of La Quinta. In 2018, ownership accounted for about 76 percent of occupied housing in La Quinta. The rental occupied dwelling units represent 38.3 percent (9,638 units) in 2018. Table 4.13-4 Housing Tenure and Vacancy (2018) Vacancy Status Units Percentage Occupied Units Owner -Occupied 11,125 44.2 Renter -Occupied 4,380 17.4 Subtotal 15,505 61.7 Vacant Units For rent 353 1.4 Rented, not occupied 28 0.1 For sale only 596 2.4 Sold, not occupied 243 1.0 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 8,004 31.8 For migrant workers 0 0 Other vacant 414 1.6 Subtotal 9,638 38.3 Total Units 25,143 100 Vacancy Rate Homeowner vacancy rate -- 5.0 Rental vacancy rate -- 7.4 Source: La Quinta General Plan 2035 and the 2022 Housing Element, Table 11-16; American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-Year Estimates Tables DP04 and 825004. In 2018 the City of La Quinta had a total of 25,143 housing units, in which 15,505 housing units, or approximately 61.7 percent of units, were occupied. Conversely, 9,638 units, or 38.3 percent, were registered as vacant according to the La Quinta Housing Element. This vacancy rate is due to the seasonal, recreational, or occasional use of many of the homes in the City. La Quinta is a popular destination for seasonal residents due to the comfortable, mild winters. The seasonal or part-time resident population is not included in the population or occupied units estimates compiled by the Census Bureau because people are classified according to the location of Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-3 October 2023 581 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING their primary residence. The State Department of Finance provides a yearly estimate of total built dwelling units and an estimate of the number of vacant dwelling units. In resort communities like La Quinta, the number of vacant dwelling units reflects the number of dwelling units that are not occupied year -around, as well as those that are ready for year -around occupancy that have not yet been occupied. The overall vacancy rate for La Quinta was 38.9 percent, while the seasonal vacancy rate was 31.8 percent. 4.13.3 Regulatory Setting State California Housing Element Law California State law requires that local governments revise the housing elements in their general plan periodically. California legislature adopted the Housing Element Law in 1969 to promote a statewide policy of providing housing opportunities for all Californians. According to Government Code Section 65580, State law declares "that the availability of housing is of vital statewide importance and the early attainment of decent housing and suitable living environment for every Californian is a priority of the highest order". Before a jurisdiction updates their General Plan Housing Element, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determines the overall housing need and total number or goal for additional units for each region. In a process called the Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA), the council of governments (a planning body representing the cities and counties in a given metropolitan area) must allocate this total number of housing units among the cities and unincorporated county areas in its region. The Housing Element is required to be updated every eight years to ensure decent and suitable housing is provided to every Californian. Regional and Local Southern California Association of Governments The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is an association of local governments and agencies that meet and coordinate to address regional issues. The SCAG region encompasses six counties: Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura, and is the largest Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the nation. It is also made up of 191 cities and covers approximately 38,618 square miles. SCAG's Community, Economic and Human Development Committee (CEHD) studies problems, programs and regional issues regarding community, economic and human development and growth. The Committee has oversight of Growth Visioning and Growth Forecasting processes, as well as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the Intergovernmental Review effort and the monitoring and analysis of the Regional Economy. Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-4 October 2023 582 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING SCAG generates Local Profiles for the cities within its region. The Local Profiles are updated every two years and provide a variety of demographic, economic, education, housing, and transportation information about each member jurisdiction. SCAG prepared a Local Profile report on the City of La Quinta in May 2019. Data used for the report was primarily gathered from the U.S. Census and California Department of Finance. 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Communities Strategy The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (also known as "Connect SoCal") was published in September 2020 and outlines the long-term vision (20+ years) of how the region will address regional transportation and land use challenges and opportunities. The RTP/SCS was prepared through a collaborative continuous and comprehensive process by SCAG to analyze the integration of land use and transportation in the SCAG region to influence sustainable growth. The Plan strives to reach state -mandated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions at the regional level through reduced per -capita vehicles miles traveled (VMT). In order to estimate the future of regional transportation and sustainability, the RTC/SCS outlines a regional vision, policies, and performance measures. According to SCAG's growth forecasts, the City of La Quinta will reach a population of 47,700 people by 2045, which is approximately 1.5 percent of the projected 2045 Riverside County total population. The number of households in the City of La Quinta is projected to increase approximately 21 percent between 2016 and 2045. Tables 4.13-5, 4.13-6, and 4.13-7 displays the regional, County and City growth forecasts, respectively. Table 4.13-5 SCAG Regional Growth Forecast 2016 2045 Population 18,832,000 22,504,000 Households 6,012,000 7,633,000 Employment 8,389,000 10,049,000 Table 4.13-6 SCAG Riverside County Growth Forecast 2016 2045 Population 2,364,000 3,252,000 Households 716,000 1,086,000 Employment 743,000 1,103,000 Table 4.13-7 SCAG La Quinta County Growth Forecast 2016 2045 Population 40,400 47,700 Households 15,400 19,400 Employment 16,700 18,700 Source: SCAG 2020-2045 Growth Forecasts. Note: All figures are rounded to the nearest 1,000. Regional Housing Needs Assessment Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-5 October 2023 583 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING SCAG is responsible for identifying future housing needs in each jurisdiction, including the City of La Quinta. To meet this mandate, SCAG develops the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) to establish future need for housing and the fair share distribution of the projected need across SCAG jurisdictions. A local jurisdiction's "fair share" of regional housing need is the number of additional dwelling units that will need to be constructed over a given period to accommodate the forecast growth, to replace expected demolitions and conversion of dwelling units to non -dwelling uses, and to achieve a vacancy rate that allows for healthy functioning of the housing market. The allocation is divided into four income categories: Very Low, Low, Moderate, and Above Moderate. The allocation is further adjusted to avoid an over -concentration of lower -income households in any one jurisdiction. Cities must also plan for the needs of extremely low-income households, which is assumed to be 50 percent of the allocation for Very Low-income units. Table 4.13-8, Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2022-2029, shows the RHNA for the City of La Quinta. As presented in this table, the City must be able to accommodate 1,530 dwelling units, representing a 6.2 percent increase in the number of existing households in the City. Table 4.13.8 Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2022-2029 Household Income Levels Income as a Percent of County Median RHNA Allocation Percent Extremely Low -- 210 13.7 Very Low Less than 50% 210 13.7 Low 51%-80% 269 17.6 Moderate 81%-120% 297 19.4 Above -Moderate Over 120% 544 35.6 Tota I 1 1,530 100 Source: La Quinta General Plan Housing Element, Table 11-49. Coachella Valley Association of Governments The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) is the regional planning agency coordinating government services in the Coachella Valley. CVAG, acting as a subregional organization within SCAG, supports the residents of Central and Eastern Riverside County and is made up of ten cities, Riverside County and two Native American tribes. CVAG is governed by a 65-member General Assembly that includes Riverside County Board of Supervisors, all mayors and council members of the incorporated cities in Eastern Riverside County, and five tribal members. The three departments that make up CVAG include the Administration Department, Energy and Environmental Resources Department, and Transportation Department. Riverside County General Plan In compliance with the Housing Element Law, the County of Riverside adopted their updated Housing Element of the County General Plan on October 3, 2017. The Housing Element of the General Plan identifies and establishes the County's policies to meet the needs of existing and future residents of Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-6 October 2023 584 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Riverside County. It establishes policies that will guide County decision -making and sets forth an action plan to implement its housing goals through year 2021. As previously stated, state law requires that jurisdictions evaluate their housing elements every eight years to determine their effectiveness in achieving county and state housing goals and objectives. With the updated Housing Element, amendments to applicable General Plan elements, such as the Land Use Element and Safety Elements, were adopted to ensure internal consistency between the General Plan Elements. Between 2000 and 2016 Riverside County grew by over 800,000 people, or approximately 52 percent, compared to the State of California, which had a population increase of 16 percent. This is displayed in Table 4.13-9. Table 4.13-9 Regional and Local Population Growth Trends, 2000-2016 Area 2000 2010 2016 Percent Change California 33,873,086 37,559,440 39,255,883 16% Riverside County 1,545,387 2,189,641 2,347,828 52% Cities 1,124,666 1,685,249 1,983,415 76% Unincorporated 420,721 504,392 364,413 -13% La Quinta 23,694 37,467 39,977 69% Source: Riverside County General Plan, Housing Element, Table H-1, Regional Population Growth Trends, 2000- 2016; October 2017; Demographic Research Unit, Department of Finance, table from the 2017 Housing Element. According to the 2017 Housing Element, approximately 30,303 new housing units are needed to accommodate anticipated population growth in the unincorporated areas of Riverside Count during the eight -year period from January 2014 to October 2021. La Quinta General Plan The Land Use Element in the City of La Quinta's General Plan (LQGP) provides guidance for buildout of the City by outlining policies and programs that define and shape high quality residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development in the City. The Land Use Element is connected to the Circulation, Parks and Recreation, Open Space, and Housing Elements of the General Plan. General Plan Housing Element The Housing Element in the LQGP establishes the City's policy relative to the maintenance and development of housing to meet the needs of existing and future residents. The LQGP Housing Element was updated and adopted in 2022 to comply with the statutory housing element update for a planning period that extends from 2022-2029. The LQGP Housing Element provides a comprehensive housing plan consisting of goals, policies and programs to address existing and projected housing needs through 2029. The purpose of the Housing Element is to establish official policy which: Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-7 October 2023 585 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING • Identifies existing and projected housing needs, and inventories resources and constraints that are relevant to meeting these needs. The assessment and inventory include: community profile, housing profile, land resource inventory, governmental and nongovernmental constraints analysis, analysis of special needs housing, and identification of assisted units "at risk" of conversion. • Identifies the community's goals, objectives, and policies relative to the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. • Sets forth a schedule of actions (programs) the City is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element. In compliance with the Housing Element Law and the RHNA, the City of La Quinta updated their Housing Element for the 2022-2029 planning period. The policies and programs are designed to identify sites to exceed the RHNA, assist in development of affordable housing, remove governmental constraints to housing, preserve the existing housing stock, provide equal housing opportunities, and promote energy and water conservation in residential uses. According to the City's current Housing Element, the City of La Quinta's RHNA new housing target is 1,530 units for the 2022-2029 planning period, to include 210 units of housing affordable to extremely low and 210 units for very low-income households, 269 units for affordable for low-income households, 297 units for affordable for moderate income households, and 544 units for above moderate income households, as illustrated in Table 4.13-8, Regional Housing Needs Assessment 2022-2029. The four major "needs" categories considered in the Housing element include overpaying for housing, overcrowding, special needs, and future housing needs. These needs influence the demand for new housing for the residents of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley. Governmental and nongovernmental factors provide constraints to housing needs in the City. The constraints that impact the cost of housing include the housing market, materials costs, infrastructure, and environmental and governmental factors. The City of La Quinta's vision of the future for housing focuses on encouraging the provision of suitable housing for all City residents while maintaining and enhancing the City's high quality of life for its residents. Through its housing programs, the City will continue to facilitate the maintenance and improvement of its existing housing stock resources and encourage the production of a variety of new housing to meet residents' needs, while preserving the overall character of the City. La Quinta General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report The City of La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR) was prepared in July 2012 to analyze the potential impacts associated with the implementation of the City of La Quinta General Plan. Potential impacts and opportunities associated with population and housing from the Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-8 October 2023 586 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING implementation of the General Plan is analyzed within the LQGP EIR. At the time the LQGP EIR was written, residential development within City limits and the Sol was 73 percent and 7.5 percent at buildout, respectively. The LQGP EIR estimated that in total, assuming that all existing dwelling units (23,489 within City limits and 801 in the Sol) were occupied, the LQGP Planning Area would provide for a projected current population of 61,454. This figure is not consistent with the actual current population of the City since many dwelling units act as second homes for part-time residents. Per the LQGP EIR, the overall Planning Area for the La Quinta General Plan has the potential to result in the development of 53,103 residential units, which could support a population of approximately 134,352 people. Therefore, the LQGP EIR concluded that implementation of the LQGP is not expected to substantially induce unplanned growth within City limits. Additionally, the LQGP would allow for the development of an additional 3,218,039± square feet of commercial space within the City limits. Although estimating the exact number of jobs that would result from commercial development, the Riverside County Center for Demographic Research projects that by 2035, there will be a total of 21,678±jobs within La Quinta City limits, in which over half of the jobs offered in La Quinta could be filled by La Quinta residents. Overall, the LQGP EIR concluded that although the General Plan has the potential to increase the population and housing development within city limits, it is not expected to result in significant unplanned growth inducing impacts. 4.13.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following thresholds are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effect. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project would have a significant effect on population and housing if it is determined that the Project will: a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? There is no standard methodology set forth in CEQA to assess the population and housing impacts of a proposed project. However, CEQA Section 15064(e) does offer guidance for the assessment of socio- economic impacts: Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-9 October 2023 587 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Economic and social changes resulting from a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment. Economic or social changes may be used, however, to determine that a physical change shall be regarded as a significant effect on the environment. Where a physical change is caused by economic or social effects of a project, the physical change may be regarded as a significant effect in the some manner as any other physical change resulting from the project. Alternatively, economic and social effects of a physical change may be used to determine that the physical change is a significant effect on the environment. If the physical change causes adverse economic or social effects on people, those adverse effects may be used as a factor in determining whether the physical change is significant. For example, if a project would cause overcrowding of a public facility and the overcrowding causes an adverse effect on people, the overcrowding would be regarded as a significant effect. Impacts on population and housing were assessed by reviewing existing and anticipated growth in population and housing provided by the DOF, SCAG, and the City of La Quinta Housing Element. The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment's impacts were evaluated by determining their consistency with these estimates and projections, as well as consistency with the General Plan goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element. Note: a number of goals and policies are specific to the City's ability to successfully encourage the development of a variety of housing stock to meet the needs of varying income levels and are not evaluated herein. Project Impact a) Induce the substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly Direct population growth occurs from the development of new residential units. Indirect population growth could result from the creation of new jobs or the removal of barriers to growth, including the adoption of a Specific Plan such as the Travertine Specific Plan Project. The proposed Project has the potential to induce both direct and indirect population growth by providing up to 1,200 new dwelling units on approximately 378.8 acres, approximately 84.5 acres of tourist commercial uses associated with the proposed resort and golf club, and generating approximately 3,250 people and 250 new part- time and full-time jobs, consistent with the Project -specific VMT Evaluation (Appendix M.2). Population Growth As stated previously, the City of La Quinta had a total population of 37,860 people in 2022 (Department of Finance). The City of La Quinta's General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzed future growth in Section III, Part L, Population and Housing. The LQGP EIR forecasts a Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-10 October 2023 588 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING population of 46,297 people by year 2035, while the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) forecasts that by 2045 the City of La Quinta will have approximately 47,700 people. The 1995 Travertine Specific Plan is included in the La Quinta General Plan and General Plan EIR analysis of population growth. Up to 2,300 residential dwelling units were proposed as a part of the 1995 Specific Plan. Using the City's average household size of 2.37 people (DOF 2022), the approved 1995 Specific Plan had the capacity to increase the City population by approximately 5,451, which is approximately 11.8 percent of the LQGP EIR's population forecast of 46,297 by 2035. The City's population forecast anticipated the increased population associated with the development of the currently Approved Travertine Specific Plan. The subject Project, the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, proposes to reduce the number of residential dwelling units; however, for the analysis of this Project, the LQGP population forecasts of 46,297 in 2035, and the SCAG population forecast of 47,700 by 2045, are utilized to determine the impacts of population generated by the proposed Project. The Project is proposing the construction of 1,200 dwelling units of varying types. Utilizing the VMT Evaluation's service population figure, the population anticipated from total buildout would equate to 3,250 new residents, for an approximate population of 41,110 in the City by 2035. This is an increase of approximately 8.6 percent, and still below the projected City's 2035 and SCAG's 2045 population forecasts of 46,297 and 47,700 people, respectively'. The proposed Project would introduce 2,201 fewer people than the Approved Travertine Specific Plan, which if built out would generate up to 5,451 people, which is approximately 40.4 percent greater population than the proposed Project. The reduced density of the proposed Project (2,300 dwelling units to 1,200 dwelling units) lowers the overall projected population in the City. The population increase associated with the Project would account for approximately 33 percent of the remaining capacity for population growth anticipated by SCAG in their RTC/SCS. Although buildout and full occupancy of the Project could potentially result in a 6.8 percent population increase of the current City population, this increase is consistent with City and regional growth projections, and public service providers and utilities will be able to adequately accommodate this growth. Therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial unanticipated population increase in the City. Impacts would be less than significant. Housing The number of estimated housing units in the City of La Quinta in 2019 was 24,643 housing units, according to SCAG's 2019 Local Profile of La Quinta; however, only approximately 15,643 units were Based on the VMT Evaluation provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix M.2), the population anticipated from total buildout would equate to 3,250 new residents, for an approximate population of 44,497 people in the City. This is an increase of approximately 7.9 percent, and still below the projected 2035 and 2045 population forecasts of 46,297 and 47,700 people, respectively. Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-11 October 2023 589 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING characterized as "occupied". The Project proposes a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units, which is a 4.87 percent increase in 2019 housing units, and 1,100 dwelling units less than the previously Approved Travertine Specific Plan, which is approved for up to 2,300 dwelling units. According to the LQGP EIR, the City of La Quinta Land Use Plan can accommodate up to 31,603 residential dwelling units within the City limits, and also could provide for 21,500 dwelling units within the Sphere of Influence (SOI). Therefore, at total buildout and inclusive of buildout of the City's SOI, the City has the potential to result in a total of 53,103 dwelling units throughout the City's Planning Area (corporate limits and SOI). The 1,200 dwelling units proposed for the Project accounts for approximately 3.8 percent of the remaining capacity for dwelling units anticipated by the LQGP EIR. Although the proposed Project would introduce up to 1,200 dwelling units to the City, the proposed Project will result in 1,100 fewer dwelling units compared to the 2,300 units permitted underthe Approved Specific Plan. The proposed Project will provide a range of housing types and densities at varying price points that could help meet the anticipated demand for housing within different economic segments of the City of La Quinta. Proposed Project housing would consist of low density residential and medium density residential units, including larger -lot estate homes and high and middle -income single-family homes. It also provides for entry-level single-family homes and attached patio and duplexes units. The goals and policies of the City's Housing Element support the development of a variety of housing types and residential densities within the City, as proposed by the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment. Therefore, while implementation of the Project would result in a direct increase in population and housing, consistent with projected residential growth for the City. Therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial increase in total housing units in the City. Impacts would be less than significant. Employment According to SCAG's Local Profile of La Quinta, in 2017 the City of La Quinta was estimated to provide 16,848 jobs, an increase of 82.4 percent from 2007. In 2018, 17,180 jobs were identified in the City of La Quinta. According to the SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast, it is projected that the City of La Quinta will provide approximately 21,678 jobs by 2035. In La Quinta, the major employers include the La Quinta Resort and Club, Desert Sands Unified School District, Walmart Super Center, Home Depot, PGA West, Costco, Imperial Irrigation District, and Target. Healthcare, educational, informational, and social assistance employ 3,373 people, the most of any sector in the City. The arts, recreation, hospitality and food service industries employ the second most people, employing 2,947 people. Using an estimated 2018 total of 15,702 occupied housing units and approximately 17,180 employees within City limits, the City economy generates a jobs to household ratio of approximately 1.09. A ratio in the range of 0.75 to 1.5 is considered beneficial in providing local employment and reducing job - Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-12 October 2023 590 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING related vehicle miles traveled (VMTs). An imbalance in jobs and housing creates more employment travel, longer commute times, more single driver commutes, constrained job opportunities for workers without vehicles, traffic congestion, and poor air quality. As stated in the LQGP EIR, the City economy is projected to provide 21,678 jobs and 22,912 dwelling units by 2035. Therefore, the City's projected jobs/housing ratio would be approximately 0.95 by 2035 upon full development or community buildout. The Project would result in direct employment -based population growth from the proposed mix of employment -generating land uses, including planned resort recreational uses. Project buildout has the potential to create approximately 250 part-time and full-time jobs. These include hospitality commercial, retail sales, resort and related service jobs. Many of these new jobs may be filled by workers already residing within the City or the Coachella Valley region or even within the proposed development. Employment growth resulting from Project implementation would result in a less than significant impacts because this increase is consistent with projected employment growth for the City. Indirect Impacts The Project proposes the extension of Jefferson Street to the north and Avenue 62 to the east. The extension of these roads would be limited to providing access to the Project property and would not serve adjoining lands upon which future development would be induced. The Project property is secluded and is isolated between flood control and groundwater management facilities and public lands. The Project will require the development of an off -site 2.5-acre electric power substation and up to five off -site domestic water wells to support Project utility demand. The location of these off -site utilities will occur east of the Project property, in an area that is planned for and has been undergoing development over the past few decades. Accordingly, the Project is not anticipated to indirectly induce growth. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere The Project property comprises undeveloped land at the southern edge of the City of La Quinta. The City of La Quinta has previously approved the development of the site for residential and mixed uses. The proposed Project does not include the demolition or conversion of existing residential dwelling units to non-residential uses. The Project does not include the displacement of any residents within the Project area. There will be no impact to the current population of the area as it is vacant land, and the population will increase based on new development. Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-13 October 2023 591 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING 4.13.5 Cumulative Impacts Buildout of the La Quinta General Plan, including the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Project, would result in potential induced direct and indirect growth within the City and surrounding areas at levels that are less than currently provided for in either City or SCAG forecasts. The Project's growth is accounted for in the La Quinta General Plan and the SCAG regional plans. The LQGP and SCAG plans account for the previous Travertine Specific Plan, which proposed 2,300 residential dwelling units, as well as commercial uses, which would result in employment opportunities in the area. The proposed Project would result in reduced direct and indirect impacts to population and housing since the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project would develop a reduced number of residential dwelling units. The City General Plan and the proposed Project provide sufficient housing to accommodate planned growth within the City, while reducing potential exceedances of City and SCAG growth targets. Therefore, the Project will not result in cumulatively considerable population and housing impacts. 4.13.6 Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. 4.13.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are necessary. 4.13.8 References 1. American Community Survey (ACS) 2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, available at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs 2. California Department of Finance (DOF), E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2021 with 2010 Census Benchmark, located at http://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ 3. California Department of Finance (DOF), E-8 Historical Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 1990-2000, August 2007, located at http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-8/ 4. California Legislative Information, Government Code, Title 7 Planning and Land Use, Division 1, Planning and Zoning, January 2018, available at https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&section Num=65580 Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-14 October 2023 592 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING 5. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Profile of the City of La Quinta —Local Profiles Report 2019, May 2019, available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/laguinta locaIprof ile. pdf?1606013533 6. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Strategic Plan, October 2018, available at http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/StrategicPIanBookletlores.pdf 7. SCAG 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy, September 2020, available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal- olan O.pdf?1606001176 8. United States Census Bureau, 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, Employment Status, available at https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/isf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk 9. US EPA, EnviroAtlas, Employment to Housing Ratio, November 2014, available at https://enviroatlas.epa.gov/enviroatlas/DataFactSheets/pdf/Supplemental/EmploVmentHou sinRRatio.pdf). Travertine Draft EIR 4.13-15 October 2023 593 Page intentionally blank 594 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et. al, La Quinta CA 4.14 Public Services 4.14 Public Services 4.14.1 Introduction This section addresses the potential impacts to fire protection, emergency medical services, and police protection, schools, parks, and other public service facilities that may result from construction or operation of the proposed Project ("Project"). The following discussion describes existing police and fire protection services, the public school system, public parks, and other service facilities. It also assesses the constraints and opportunities to providing these services to the subject and surrounding properties, identifies and analyzes potential Project impacts on the provision of these services, and recommends measures to reduce or avoid adverse impacts that may be associated with Project development and operation. This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, coordination with multiple City departments, including planning, policy and fire, the La Quinta General Plan. Sources used in the preparation of this section are identified in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of acronyms used in this Draft EIR. 4.14.2 Existing Conditions The Project property is comprised of undeveloped land within the City of La Quinta. Under the City of La Quinta General Plan, the property was approved for development of a mixed -use residential community known as the Travertine Specific Plan. Please refer to Chapter 3.0 (Project Description), for further discussion of the on -site development that was previously approved by the City. Fire Protection Services The Project property is served by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) under contract with CalFire. The RCFD provides 24-hour fire protection and emergency medical services to the City. Within the City, there are three City -owned fire stations which include Fire Station 32, Station 70, and Station 93. Each station is staffed with full-time paid and volunteer firefighters. Fire Station 32 is equipped with a primary and reserve fire engine, volunteer squad and rescue vehicles. Fire Station 70, the closest station to the Project property, is equipped with a primary engine, a brush fire engine, and a volunteer squad. Fire Station 93 is equipped with a primary engine and a reserve engine. Table 4.14-1 lists the three fire stations, their locations, and their distance from the Project's proposed entrance on Avenue 62. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-1 October 2023 595 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Table 4.14-1 La Quinta Fire Station Locations Fire Station Location Distance from Avenue 62 Fire Station 32 78111 Avenue 52 6.0 miles northwest Fire Station 70 54001 Madison Street 4.0 miles north Fire Station 93 44555 Adams Street 9.0 miles northwest Emergency medical paramedic services are currently provided to the City by American Medical Response (AMR), a private paramedic ambulance company. AMR operates a fleet of ambulances serving the City and region. AMR is connected to the County's dispatch system and responds in conjunction with Fire Department personnel. The City has a cooperative agreement with the County of Riverside, which ensures the City is provided with an array of services from fire protection to hazardous materials disposition and medical emergencies. County -wide, RCFD partners with 21 cities for contract services, which include most of the Coachella Valley. RCFD operates under a Regional Fire Protection Program, which allows all their fire stations to provide support as needed regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. Per the La Quinta 2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the average RCFD response times are between 5 and 7 minutes. The Travertine Fire Master Plan documents that with the Project Design Features identified in the Fire Master Plan, an additional expansion of current facilities and staff beyond those contemplated in the City's adopted Capital Improvement Program will not be needed to serve the proposed Project and the Project can satisfy performance objectives for fire service. As stated above, the station nearest to the Project site is Fire Station No. 70, located at 54-001 Madison Street. This station is equipped with a primary engine, a brush fire engine, and a volunteer squad vehicle. Current minimum staffing for all fire stations includes 3 firefighters per front -roll fire engine. Volunteer Reserve firefighters are used to supplement paid staff. New development, including but not limited to the proposed Project, is currently anticipated in the southeastern portion of the City. In order to provide an acceptable future level of service for the southeastern portion of the City, the City has identified a site for a future fire station at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. The future fire station will serve the southern portion of the City, including the Project property and surrounding area. The Project will fund its share of the fire station costs through the fire facilities portion of the City's Development Impact Fees program. Police Protection The City has contracted for police services from the Riverside County Sheriff's Department since its incorporation in 1982. The Sheriff's Department provides 24-hour police protection and operates in the City as the La Quinta Police Department, using dedicated facilities, equipment, and personnel. The City of La Quinta operates one police office within the City limits located at the Civic Center Community Policing Office, at 78495 Calle Tampico. In addition, the Thermal Sheriff's Station located 86625 Airport Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-2 October 2023 596 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Boulevard in Thermal, is the Sheriff's Department's central facility forth is portion of the Coachella Valley. The police stations, their locations, and distances from the Project property are set forth in Table 4.14- 2, below. Table 4.14-2 La Quinta Police Station Locations Station Location Distance from Avenue 62 Civic Center Community 78495 Calle 6.10 miles northwest Policing Office Tampico, La Quinta Thermal Sheriff's Station (Riverside County Sheriff's 86625 Airport 6.15 miles northeast Department) Boulevard, Thermal The City's police department patrols 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and 24-hours a day. The department serves a population of approximately 41,247 residents and patrols over 33 square miles. The City also employs volunteers that assist the Sheriff's Department, through the "Citizens on Patrol" (COP) program. Volunteers are trained by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and support department deputies. Officers assigned to the City perform investigations, traffic controls, and general patrol duties. The Special Enforcement Team supplements the patrol division and provides investigative and preventive support in the community. The Police Department also operates community programs in the City, including a School Resource Officer program at all local schools; a Junior Cadet program; a Crime Stoppers program; the aforementioned volunteer Citizens on Patrol Program; and Community Service Officers assigned to each division and acting as Community Program Coordinator responsible for Neighborhood Watch programs and community liaison. The City also relies on mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdictions for additional police support, when necessary. The generally accepted standard for sworn police officers is one for every 1,000 residents. The City Police Department has indicated that current facilities and staffing are sufficient to adequately serve the new Travertine community. The average emergency response time in the City is 5 minutes 39 seconds, depending on deputy location during shift, which is an acceptable response time.' Schools The City is served by two public school districts, Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD), both of which provide Kindergarten through Grade 12 education. Both Districts are funded through a number of sources, including a portion of local property taxes, bond issues, State funds and developer fees. Developer fees were established by Assembly Bill 2926 (AB 2926), effective 1986, which authorizes Districts to charge developers an impact fee that is 1 From email correspondence with the La Quinta Police Department's Lieutenant Andres Martinez, on October 27, 2022. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-3 October 2023 597 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES used for the construction of new facilities. The fee changes periodically and is calculated on a per unit or per square foot basis, depending on the type of development. DSUSD serves families located west of Jefferson Street and north of Avenue 48. A small portion of the Project property is located within DSUSD. CVUSD serves families located east of Jefferson Street and south of Avenue 48, including the Project property. CVUSD has four schools (none of which are located within the City limits) that serve students in the City. Westside Elementary School is the closest school to the Project property, located approximately 3.15 miles to the northeast. Table 4.14-3 lists the four CVUSD schools that serve students in La Quinta, their locations and distance from the proposed Project. Table 4.14-3 CVUSD Schools Serving La Quinta School Location Distance from Project Westside Elementary 82225 Airport Boulevard, Thermal 3.15 miles northeast Cahuilla Desert Academy 82489 Avenue 52, Coachella 4.60 miles northeast Mountain Vista Elementary 49750 Hjorth Street, Indio 5.20 miles northeast Coachella Valley High School 83800 Airport Boulevard, Thermal 4.15 miles northeast As of the 2019/2020 school year, CVUSD had 17,495 students enrolled. CVUSD, in their 2020 Fee Justification Report, conducted a capacity analysis that determined their capacity and enrollment to identify existing capacity to serve future students. The analysis determined CVUSD has excess capacity at its elementary and high school levels to accommodate students from new development. Middle schools were over -capacity by 90 students for the 2019/2020 school year (See Table 4.14-4). Table 4.14-4 Existing CVUSD School Capacity (2019/2020) School Level 2019/20 Capacity 2019/20 Enrollment Existing Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) Elementary School (Grades K-6) 12,216 9,604 2,612 Middle School (Grades 7-8) 2,828 2,918 (90) High School (Grades 9-12) 5,960 4,973 987 Total 21,004 17,495 3,509 Source: CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 2020. Current CVUSD developer fees are $4.08/sq.ft. for residential and $0.66/sq.ft. for commercial for new development. Monies collected are used for construction and reconstruction of school facilities. Approximately 34,645 new dwelling units are anticipated to be constructed within the jurisdictional boundaries of CVUSD by the year 2040. Of these new dwelling units, approximately 21.46 percent have mitigated the impact of their development through a mitigation agreement. Since a small portion of the Project property is located within DSUSD's boundary, the Project will also be required to pay the current DSUSD developer fees. Currently, these fees are $4.79/sq.ft. for residential and $0.78/sq.ft. for commercial. As previously stated, monies collected are used for construction and reconstruction of school facilities. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-4 October 2023 598 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES The DSUSD Study determined that the District had excess capacity at its elementary and middle school levels to accommodate students from new development. However, high schools were over -capacity by 69 students for the 2021/2022 school year. This is indicated in the table below. See Table 4.14-5 for DSUSD school capacity in 2021/2022. Table 4.14-5 Existing DSUSD School Capacity (2021/2022) School Level Fall 2021 Capacity Fall 2021 Enrollment Existing Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) Elementary School (Grades K-5) 12,869 11,347 1,522 Middle School (Grades 6-8) 6,666 6,059 607 High School (Grades 9-12) 9,255 9,324 (69) Total 28,790 26,730 2,060 Source: DSUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, February 2022. Parks The City of La Quinta offers a variety of passive and active recreational opportunities for residents and visitors to the region. There are approximately 5,259 acres of open space areas set aside for recreational facilities in the City. These developed open space recreational areas include a variety of City -owned and maintained parks and facilities, County owned parks, Desert Recreation District facilities, and public and private golf courses. In addition, there are approximately 6,933 acres of natural open space areas within the City offering hiking trails, equestrian trails, and other passive recreation opportunities. The City of La Quinta currently has 15 public parks within the City boundaries. Table 4.14-6, Parks within the City of La Quinta, lists the various parks within the City, their locations, acreages, and amenities. Also see Section 4-15 (Recreation) of this DEIR. The La Quinta General Plan requires the provision of 5 acres of parkland per every 1000 residents. Based on this standard, a population of 79,956 at buildout would require a total of 395 acres of parkland. The City currently has approximately 806.44 acres of public parks within its boundaries. La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.48 establishes criteria for dedicating land, or payment of in lieu fees for construction of new parks or recreational facilities or rehabilitation of existing facilities. The ordinance states that residential subdivisions, containing less than five parcels, and nonresidential subdivisions, are exempt from dedication or park fees. All other residential developments are required to pay a park development fee, dedicate land, or both. Section 13.48.050 states that parkland dedication requirements shall equal three acres of parkland per one thousand people in a new subdivision. The number of people in a new subdivision is determined by multiplying the number of dwelling units in the subdivision by the average household size. Per Section 13.48.050, the average household size is based on the latest U.S. Census information. Based on the U.S. Census information, the average household size in the City is 2.55 people. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-5 October 2023 599 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Table 4.14-6 Parks within the City of La Quinta Facility Location Acres Amenities Lake Cahuilla 58075 Jefferson St., 0.90 Camping, 135-acre lake, fishing, hiking, and Regional Park miles west of the project 710 horseback riding Cove Oasis Top of the Cove, 3.40 miles Picnic tables and walking paths connected northwest of the project 1 to hiking trails Velasco Park Calle Temecula, 3.30 miles Neighborhood park with playground, grass northwest of project 0.23 area, benches Event Park at Southeast corner of Avenue SilverRock Resort passive park venue to SilverRock 52 and SilverRock Way, 3.30 include parking lot, walking paths, turf miles northwest of project 14.0 areas, sloped event lawn, water features, and recreation building Eisenhower 53400 Eisenhower Dr., 3.50 Neighborhood park with playground, grass Park miles northwest of project 046 . area, benches Fritz Burns Park 78107 Avenue 52, 4.0 miles Playground, dog park, skate park, swimming northwest of the project 6.0 pool, tennis courts, water features, picnic tables La Quinta 77865 Avenida Montezuma, Community fitness center, baseball field, Community 4.40 miles northwest of the 4.71 basketball court, playground, benches, Park project picnic tables Civic Center 78495 Calle Tampico, 4.20 Picnic tables, public art, restrooms, walking Campus miles north of the project 17.5 paths, and water features Sports Complex 78900 Park Avenue, 4.50 Ball fields, picnic tables, restrooms miles northwest of the 16.4 project Season's Park 78301 Calle Las Ramblas, Playground, grass areas, dog park 4.45 miles northwest of the 5.0 project Saguaro Park Saguaro Road, 4.70 miles Playground, benches, grass areas, tables northwest of the project 0.24 La Quinta Park 78468 Westward Ho Dr., Playground, skate park, BBQs, water 6.25 miles northwest of the 18.08 features, picnic tables project Desert Pride Birchcrest Circle, 6.60 miles Playground, grass area Park northwest of the project 1.06 Pioneer Park 78695 Miles Ave., 6.75 miles 3.22 Playground, grass areas, dog park, picnic northwest of project tables, benches Monticello Park Fred Waring Dr., 7.0 miles Playground, grass area, benches north of the project 3.92 Adams Park 78930 La Palma Dr., 7.0 Playground, grass field, picnic tables, miles north of the project 4.62 benches Source: La Quinta City website, "Parks" page, 2022. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-6 October 2023 00 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES In addition to the community parks, walking and hiking trails also exist within the City of La Quinta. Hiking occurs in the southern portion of the City, south of the Cove neighborhood. Table 4.14-7 lists the hiking trails within the City. Table 4.14-7 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta Facility Location Miles Boo Hoff Trail 0.25 miles west of the Project 8.92 Cove to Lake Trail 1.30 miles northwest of Project 2.41 Bear Creek 3.64 miles northwest of Project 4.0 Source: La Quinta City website, Hiking page. Trail locations and length taken from City website. Other Public Facilities The City owns and/or operates a number of facilities which provide public services to the community. This includes City Hall, the La Quinta Library, the La Quinta Museum, as well as various recreational facilities. Table 4.14-8 lists the City's public facilities and their distance from the Project property. Table 4.14-8 Public Facilities within the City of La Quinta Facility Location Distance from Project City Hall 78495 Calle Tampico 4.70 miles northwest La Quinta Library 78275 Calle Tampico 4.75 miles northwest La Quinta Museum 77885 Avenida Montezuma 4.75 miles northwest City Hall La Quinta City Hall is located at 78495 Calle Tampico, and provides a full range of municipal services, including Code Compliance, Building and Safety, Planning, Recreation, Public Works, and Economic Development. La Quinta Library The La Quinta Library is located at 78275 Calle Tampico. The City owns the library facility, which is operated by Riverside County. The Library contains 89,060 volumes within a 20,000 square foot space. Although the City has not established a standard for library facilities, the County Library system aims for an un-adopted standard of two volumes per capita. Based on this standard, existing library facilities are sufficient to serve the current population. La Quinta Museum The La Quinta Museum showcases La Quinta's history and cultural arts through displays on two floors. The La Quinta Museum is a Cultural Museum with two exhibit galleries. Gallery 1 features local history exhibits while Gallery 2 features new revolving exhibits that change every 3 to 4 months. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-7 October 2023 601 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES 4.14.3 Regulatory Setting State California Building Code The California Building Code establishes the minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, access to persons with disabilities, sanitation, adequate lighting and ventilation and energy conservation; safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment; and to provide safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. California Fire Code State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which include regulations concerning building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices and standards and fire suppression training. California Government Code Section 66477 California Government Code Section 66477, more commonly referred to as the Quimby Act, was passed in 1975. The Quimby Act authorized counties and cities to pass ordinances requiring developers to set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. Revenues generated by the Quimby Act cannot be used for the operation and maintenance of park facilities. The Quimby Act was originally designed to ensure "adequate" open space acreage in jurisdictions adopting Quimby Act standards (i.e., 3 to 5 acres per 1,000 residents). According to the California Department of Parks and Recreation's overview of the Quimby Act, the Quimby Act was substantially amended in 1982 to further define acceptable uses of or restrictions on Quimby funds, provide acreage/population standards and formulas for determining the exaction, and indicate that the exactions must be closely tied (i.e., have a nexus) to a Project's impact as identified through traffic studies required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Senate Bill SO: Leroy Greene School Facilities Act Senate Bill 50 (SB 50 or the "Leroy Greene School Facilities Act") was enacted in 1998. Section 65995 of the California Government Code establishes the statutory criteria for assessing school construction fees. The legislation recognizes the need for fees to be adjusted periodically to keep pace with inflation; therefore, the State of California Department of General Services State Allocation Board increases the maximum fees according to the adjustment for inflation in the statewide cost index for Class B construction. The payment of school mitigation impact fees authorized by SB 50 is deemed to provide full and complete mitigation of project impacts on school facilities pursuant to Section 65995 of the Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-8 October 2023 602 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES California Government Code. SB 50 provides that a State or local agency may not deny or refuse to approve the planning, use, or development of real property on the basis of a developer's refusal to provide mitigation in amounts in excess of that established by SB 50. Local La Quinta General Plan The La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) was adopted by the City of La Quinta pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law, California Government Code 65000 et seq. The LQGP's Parks, Recreation and Trails, Emergency Services, and Public Facilities Elements discuss public services provided by the City of La Quinta. The Parks, Recreation and Trails Element provides descriptions of existing parks and recreational facilities, identifies the current and projected demand for parks as the City grows, and establishes goals, policies and programs which allow the City to continue to provide a full range of recreational amenities and services to its residents and businesses. The Emergency Services Element addresses multiple components of the City's safety services, including police and fire service, emergency medical response, and emergency preparedness. The Emergency Services Element establishes goals, policies, and programs to aid the City in meeting its responsibilities in an emergency. The Public Facilities Element provides description of these facilities, and establishes goals, policies and programs which will allow the City to continue to provide a full range of municipal services to the residents and businesses in the City. La Quinta Municipal Code Title 8 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) is implemented for all building and construction occurring in the City. Title 8 is based on the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), which sets minimum design and standards for construction of buildings and structures that must also meet minimum fire requirements. La Quinta Fire Code (Chapter 8.08) adopts the 2019 CBC California Fire Code with City amendments and establishes the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practice for providing a reasonable level of life safety and property protection from the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises, and to provide safety to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations within the City. Chapter 3.17 (Fire and Police Facilities and Equipment Fund and Traffic Signalization Fund) of the Municipal Code establishes development fees prior to issuance of a building permit in connection with development of any new residential unit or of any nonresidential construction or addition. This fund provides sites, facilities, and equipment required by the demand for services from new developments in the City. Chapter 13.48 (Park Dedications [Quimby Act]) of the Municipal Code establishes criteria for the dedication of land or payment of in -lieu fees for the development of new, or rehabilitation or enhancement of existing community parks or recreational facilities in accordance with Government Code Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-9 October 2023 603 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Chapter 66477. These provisions apply to all residential subdivisions of land, except subdivisions containing less than five parcels and nonresidential subdivisions. 4.14.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The thresholds derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines are used to determine the level of potential effect. The proposed Project would have a potentially significant effect on public services if it is determined that the Project a. Would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any other public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other Public facilities? Methodology This analysis considers whether the proposed Project would require the construction of new governmental or recreational facilities or alterations to such facilities to maintain acceptable performance standards for public services. This analysis was conducted by consultation with various officials with the Sheriff's Department, Fire Department, and School Districts to confirm capacity and staffing.' The analyses was also informed by the approved Travertine Fire Master Plan. The Travertine Fire Master Plan were prepared for the Project to aid in determining whether additional facilities or facility modifications beyond those contemplated in the City's adopted Capital Improvement Program would be needed in order to maintain public service objectives with the development and operation of the Project. The Travertine Fire Master Plan evaluates the development of up to 600 residential units, while EIR evaluates full buildout of the Project (i.e., 1,200 residential units). Both the Fire Master Plan and the analysis in this EIR rely on current City fire and emergency service systems, their ' La Quinta Police Department: Lieutenant Andres Martinez, on October 27, 2022, via email; Fire Department: email correspondence with Kohl Hetrick on September 28, 2022; CVUSD Facilities Department: Leticia C. Torres, on November 16, 2022, via email. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-10 October 2023 604 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES capabilities, and limitations in relation to the development of the Project, and identified fire suppression methods, Project evacuation time, and an area of refuge in an event of an emergency. As previously stated, a majority of the Project property is located within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD), and a small portion (approximately 6 lots) is located within the Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) boundary. The impact analyses was also informed by the Fee Justification Studies prepared by CVUSD and DSUSD. According to the CVUSD Fee Justification Study, in the 2019/2020 school year CVUSD had 17,495 students enrolled. As discussed above, the analysis determined CVUSD has excess capacity at its elementary and high school levels to accommodate students from new development. Middle schools were over -capacity by 90 students for the 2019/2020 school year (see Table 4.14-4, above). However, the District does not have plans to build a new middle school. According to DSUSD's 2022 Fee Justification Study, DSUSD had 26,730 students enrolled in the 2021/2022 school year (see Table 4.14-5, above). Within DSUSD, high schools were over -capacity by 69 students for the 2021/2022 school year. However, DSUSD does not have plans to develop a new high school. Student generation rates provided by CVUSD and DSUSD were utilized to analyze the number of students generated by a project. The generation rates represent the number of students, or portion, expected to attend district schools from each new dwelling unit. According to DSUSD, the generation rate for elementary schools is 0.1486; middle schools is 0.0793; and high schools is 0.1221. For CVUSD the generation rate for elementary schools is 0.3974; middle schools is 0.1207; and high schools is 0.2058. The Project proposes 1,200 residential units. Based on the generation rates for the school districts, the Project will generate 864 students in CVUSD and 3 students in DSUSD. This is indicated in the tables below. Table 4.14-9 CVUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate School Type Dwelling Units Generation Rate* Students Generated** Elementary School 1,194 0.3974 474 Middle School 1,194 0.1207 144 High School 1,194 0.2058 246 Total New Students 864 *Source: 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 5, 2020. **Students generated rounded. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-11 October 2023 605 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Table 4.14-10 DSUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate School Type Dwelling Units** Generation Rate* Students Generated*** Elementary School 6 0.1486 1 Middle School 6 0.0793 1 High School 6 0.1221 1 Total New Students 3 *Source: 2022 DSUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 2022. **Dwelling units based on residential lots within DSUSD's boundary. For residential lots located in both school district boundaries, the district was determined based on whether the residential lot was located in the majority of the boundary. ***Students generated rounded. Project Design Features The proposed Project will be required to comply with existing regulations and standards (identified in the discussions below) to ensure that the Project's potential impacts associated with public facilities and services related to fire and police emergency and non -emergency services, as well as impacts to schools, are not significant. The Project and residential areas shall be gated, with the intention of increasing community security and minimizing potential crimes, and consistent with standard operations of resort communities, the proposed resort will incorporate private security services to maximize security of the overall Project. Additionally, lighting features throughout the Project will enhance security and maximize visibility within the Project streets, intersections and other crosswalks. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows will be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code Appendix B and Appendix C in effect at the time of development. Project Impacts a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any other public services: Fire Protection Development and operation of the proposed Project may cause an incremental increase in demand for emergency services. The closest fire station to the Project property is Station 70, located 4.0 miles north of the property, at 54001 Madison Street. Due to the distance to the nearest fire station and remoteness of the Project property, RCFD indicated that the proposed Project may not be adequately served by fire protection services within the 5-7-minute response time, resulting in potentially significant impact to fire Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-12 October 2023 .1. 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES service performance objectives until the proposed Project circulation network is completed. Therefore, a Project -specific Fire Master Plan (FMP) was developed to analyze emergency access to the Project property and determine and implement strategies at the Project property to improve RCFD and CAL Fire operations and service delivery before Jefferson Street improvements are completed (Mitigation Measure PS-1). The FMP ensures adequate access to the interior of the Project property by providing Fire Department approved emergency access points, roadway design standards for fire protection vehicles, minimum water quantity and pressure necessary for firefighting, building construction standards, emergency power facilities for the proposed booster stations and an area of refuge. The Plan further states that conformance to the full circulation plan is required for any additional development beyond Phase 1 of the Project. The later phases of development would include the improvement of Jefferson Street, which would provide an additional access to the Project property. See Mitigation Measure PS-1. Enhanced fire safety mitigation measures (PS-2) are below to ensure maintenance of fire service performance objectives. With Mitigation Measures PS-1 and PS-2 additional facilities beyond those already identified in the City's approved Capital Improvement Program will not be necessary to ensure attainment of fire service performance objectives. Enhanced Fire Service Measures (Mitigation Measure PS-2) will address building construction standards, emergency power facilities for the proposed booster stations, an area of refuge, optic -con sensors located to open gates ahead of fire engine arrival, implementation of a community emergency response team (CEMA) programs; and HOA/community training for CPR and AED and risk reduction programs. As discussed above, in order to provide an acceptable level of service to the southern portion of La Quinta, which is experiencing development and increased service demands, the County Fire Department has preliminary plans for a future fire station to serve this portion of the City. A potential fire station site has been identified at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. The response time from this potential location to the Project property is approximately 6 minutes. The Travertine Project will be required to provide the fair share portion of development fees for fire station funding. The new fire station will be necessary to meet planned and anticipated development whether or not the Project is approved. An assessment of the environmental impacts of the new station would be speculative at this time. The lead agency for the fire station project will be required to comply with CEQA prior to approving the new fire station. With implementation of Mitigation Measures PS-1 and PS-2, Project impacts to fire service will be less than significant. The Project would be required to implement all applicable fire safety requirements, to include installation of fire hydrants, and sprinkler systems. Moreover, the Project would be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) in place at the time of construction. The current per unit DIF for detached single-family residential is $9,380. Payment of these fees goes towards the funding of public facilities including but not limited to fire stations, park and recreation facilities, major thoroughfares and bridges and traffic signalization, public safety facilities and other public buildings. Off -Site Utilitv Field Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-13 October 2023 607 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES In addition to the 855-acre development property, the Project proposes an off -site utility field, which will include the development of five domestic water wells and a 2.5-acre electric power substation. The exact locations of these offsite improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed east of the Project property, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. Currently, the offsite locations consist of vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land. The general area that includes the potential offsite properties is characterized by low density residential, private golf course communities, agricultural activities and individual ranch properties. The Project applicant will be required to purchase the offsite properties, once locations acceptable to CVWD and IID have been determined. Construction of on -site and off -site improvements may briefly impact emergency response times. After consultation with RCFD, the department may require implementation of Construction Traffic Control Plans during construction of the improvements. Construction Traffic Control Plans, if required during construction, would reduce impacts to fire protection and emergency medical services and response times. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. It is anticipated that IID and CVWD will each require a Traffic Control Plan indicating that prior to site modification, the applicant shall prepare and submit for review and approval detailed construction traffic management plans, including street closure information, detour plans, haul routes, and staging plans as necessary for any off -site work that would encroach on public right-of-way. Police Protection The City has no established staffing ratio, and police staffing in La Quinta is based on the safety needs of the local community and the available resources to provide these safety needs. Email correspondence on October 27, 2022 with the La Quinta Police Department's Lieutenant Andres Martinez, confirmed that the City of La Quinta currently has 49 sworn officers and 6 community service officers. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department currently has a staffing ratio of 1.23 officers per 1,000 residents, which exceeds the generally acceptable ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 residents. Based on the most recent population numbers provided by the Department of Finance (DOF), City's current population in 2022 is 37,860, thus resulting in the current ratio of 1.35 officers per 1,000 residents. Project build -out could add approximately 3,250 new residents to the City, based on the VMT Evaluation provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix L.2). At current staffing levels, the Project's added population would result in a city-wide ratio of 1.19 officers per resident, which exceeds the 1 per 1,000 generally acceptable ratio. Based on discussion with the City Police Department there are adequate facilities and staffing sufficient to serve the Project. The development would occur within an area with existing residential uses, which is already being served and patrolled by the La Quinta Police Department. Additionally, the Project complies with the 2035 Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-14 October 2023 I 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES General Plan Emergency Services Policy ES-1.6 in that all new development proposals shall continue to be routed to the Police Department to assure that the Project access and design provide for a defensible space and maximum crime prevention while maintaining City design standards and codes. Emergency Services Policy ES-1.5 states that the City shall continue to work with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department to accurately forecast future needs and provide adequate and timely expansion of services and facilities. The LQGP EIR directs the City to monitor City population and Police Department staffing levels to ensure the provision of police protection services at sufficient levels. On an annual basis, the City shall evaluate response times and police activity to assure adequate protection. The Project would also be required to comply with Development Impact Fees in place at the time of construction. The current DIF fee for detached single-family residential is $9,380, which the City documented is adequate to mitigate any significant impacts to public facilities from new development. Payment of these fees goes towards the funding of public facilities including but not limited to fire stations, equipment, park and recreation facilities, major thoroughfares and bridges and traffic signalization. In addition, the Project property will generate transient occupancy and sales tax revenue that the City can use to fund additional officers and other personnel to increase staffing levels for the police services provided to the Project property and Citywide. The impact to police services will be less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field The Project proposes off -site utility field improvements including the development of five domestic water wells and a 2.5-acre substation. The exact locations of the off -site utility field improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed east of the Project property, generally between Avenue 58 on the north, Avenue 62 on the south, Calhoun Street on the east, and Almonte Drive and Monroe Street on the west. The Project applicant will acquire the off -site utility field sites once the locations have been determined available and acceptable to CVWD and IID. Once the offsite location is determined, project -specific CEQA analysis will be conducted by or at the direction of CVWD and IID. Construction of the off -site utility field improvements may briefly impact area accessibility but will be short-term. These utility projects may require implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan during construction of the offsite improvements and thereby reduce impacts to police protection services, fire and emergency medical response times. Utility -related construction impacts will cease once construction is completed. Operation of the off -site well sites and substation would not result in any impacts to police services, as it is an automated activity that is part of CVWD's and IID's operations, respectively. Schools As previously discussed, the Project will result in a mixed -use development with up to 1,200 single family detached units. A majority of the Project property is located within CVUSD's boundaries; however, a Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-15 October 2023 IT -We 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES small portion (approximately 6 residential lots) is located within DSUSD's boundary. The residential portion of the Project property has the potential to generate 867 new students based on CVUSD's and DSUSD's Student Generation Rates, as indicated in Table 4.14-11, below. Table 4.14-11 CVUSD and DSUSD Generation Rates CVUSD DSUSD Generation Rate Students Generated* Generation Rate Students Generated* Elementary School 0.3974 474 0.1486 1 Middle School 0.1207 144 0.0793 1 High School 0.2058 246 0.1221 1 Total -- 864 -- 3 Source: CVUSD Fee Justification Study, 2020; DSUSD Fee Justification Study 2022 *Students Generated rounded to the nearest tenth. Prior to the issuance of building permits the proposed Project will be required to pay school impact fees for all development within the Project property. Schools will also receive funding from residents from State property taxes, income taxes, as well as local sales taxes. Because additional school facilities are not anticipated as a result of the project, impacts to school services are considered to be less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field The Project proposes the development of an off -site utility field, which will include five well sites and a 2.5-acre substation within a 2-mile radius of the Project property. Neither the installation of the off -site improvements nor their operations will have any impact on school facilities, as the proposed facilities will be operated by CVWD and HD. Therefore, there will be no increase in the demand for school facilities as a result of this component of the Project. Parks The Project is proposing to develop a residential and resort community, consisting of 1,200 residential dwelling units, 100 resort villas and wellness spa on 38.3 acres, and a golf training facility with 4-hole practice course and banquet facilities on 46.2 acres. The Project proposes various trails and parks for residents and guests. Neighborhood and community parks, trails, and a central private spine trail that bisects the residential areas of the property will be accessible to the Project residents; while the approximately 5-mile-long public Grand Loop Trail that will be developed around the perimeter of the Project property will be accessible to the public from Avenue 62 and separated from the proposed planning areas by perimeter fencing. Pedestrian walkways, strolling trails, and an intra-connector trail will be located throughout the property, in addition to private picnic tables and barbeques. These private Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-16 October 2023 610 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES facilities occupy approximately 23.5 acres of the Project property3. The public golf practice facilities (including golf academy, driving range, and putting course), and staging facilities for the public regional interpretive trail will encompass approximately 27.2 acres of the Project property. Pursuant to the La Quinta Municipal Code (Section 13.48.050), the City goal is to provide a minimum of 3.0 acres of usable parkland per 1,000 residents. Section 13.48.050 requires usable parkland area per resident be determined by calculating the Project -generated population using the people per household (pph) identified in the U.S. Census. Currently, the City exceeds its level of service and the amount of parkland required by the Quimby Act, and new residents would not significantly impact park facilities. The Project includes approximately 23.5 acres of private parkland for the residents of the Project property, and approximately 27.2 acres of public parkland. According to the U.S. Census, the pph in the City of La Quinta is 2.55. With this 2.55 pph, it can be assumed that the Project would result in 3,060 residents (1,200 units multiplied by 2.55). The Project property will provide 7.68 acres of private parkland per 1,000 residents, and 8.89 acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents, for a combined total of 15.7 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (in compliance with Section 13.48.050). The Project property would provide approximately 15.7 acres of park land per 1,000 residents, therefore exceeding the City's Municipal Code policy of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents. See Section 4.15, Recreation, of this Draft EIR for further analysis. The Project will also be required to comply with the City's Development Impact Fees which includes a Park and Recreation fee and would be required to either dedicate public parkland or pay in -lieu fees per the Quimby Act. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. Further, the Project is designed to provide a parkland to population ratio that exceeds City requirements and thus benefits the City. Off -Site Utility Field The Project proposes the development of up to five offsite well sites and a 2.5-acre substation. Neither the installation of the off -site improvements nor their operations will have any impact on park facilities or accessible open space lands. These utility improvements will be integrated into CVWD's and IID's operations, and no new household formation or residents will result from this component of the Project. Therefore, there will be no increase in the demand for school facilities as a result of this component of the Project. Other Public Facilities The Project proposes residential, resort, and open space recreational and natural uses to the approximately 855-acre property. In addition to the onsite improvements, the Project also proposes the development of off -site well sites and a 2.5-acre substation. Operation of the off -site improvements will s This number does not include the potential for pocket and neighborhood parks, dependent on developer design for the residential community. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-17 October 2023 611 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES provide water and electrical service to the proposed Project to support the future population of the Project property. The Project could generate an additional 3,250 residents at full buildout. This would be an increase of 7.9 percent of the City's current (2022) population of 37,860 and still below the projected 2035 City population forecast of 46,297. Residents and resort guests will generate limited demand for increased municipal administrative services for everyday activities, including building permits, business licenses and short-term vacation rental permitting and monitoring. However, these increases in demand for services will be low, given the mixed -use nature of the Project, total potential increase in population, and fees and tax revenues generated by the Project will offset any marginal increase in demand for these services. Because the on -site and off -site infrastructure is designed to meet the Project's demand for services, the Project will not directly or indirectly induce substantial growth. Additionally, and in light of the various fee programs the Project is subject to, the proposed Project will not result in any substantial adverse physical impacts to existing schools, parks, or other public facilities. With the recommended mitigation measures, the Project will not generate a significant increase in demand that would warrant the expansion or construction of new public facilities. Therefore, impacts related to schools, parks, or other public facilities would be less than significant. 4.14.5 Cumulative Impacts Police and Fire Protection Implementation of the proposed Project and other related projects in the area under buildout of the General Plan would result in an incremental increase in demand for police and fire protection services over time, consistent with planned growth and fire protection needs analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR. Mitigation Measures PS-1 and PS-2 will reduce the Project's cumulatively considerable impact on fire service to below a level of significance. The Project alone would increase permanent, seasonal and tourist populations. However, all future projects will be required to implement all applicable police and fire safety requirements, to include installation Knox -Box security on all project gates, installation of fire hydrants and sprinkler systems, provision of on -site security and defensive project design. All project development will be required to pay applicable Development Impact Fees (DIF) in place at the time of construction. These fees are designed to meet the demand on City services resulting from new development as it occurs, and are based on General Plan build out estimates In order to continue to provide an acceptable level of service, the City annually assesses police staffing levels, and also has preliminary plans for a future fire station to serve this portion of the City. This will ensure that police and fire services continue to be provided in the City at appropriate response rates. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-18 October 2023 612 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES The Project and future developments in the City would be required to pay Development Impact Fees at the time they are constructed. Schools It is expected that land designated for residential development in the City of La Quinta will be developed in the future, increasing household formation and the student population and impacts to public schools. The proposed Project, along with future projects, is expected to result in a cumulative increase in the demand for school services. The State -mandated payment of developer fees will help the Districts expand their facilities to accommodate students in the school district. The proposed Project is estimated to generate a K-12 student population of approximately 864 students at CVUSD and 3 at DSUSD and will be required to pay developer fees to CVUSD and DSUSD. The proposed Project's contribution to demand for school services is not cumulatively considerable, in that it alone would not necessitate the construction of a new school facilities. Future developments in the City would also be required to pay developer fees at the time they are constructed, as established by State law, to ensure that their impacts to schools and once new facility needs are identified they would be subject to CEQA review by the Districts prior to construction. Parks Implementation of the proposed Project and other related projects in the area would increase the City's demands on parks. The Project alone would increase permanent and tourist populations. However, the Project also proposes approximately 23.5 acres of private parkland for the residents of the Project, and approximately 27.2 acres of public parkland, which would more than accommodate the population increase. Additionally, the Project will be required to comply with the City's Development Impact Fees which includes a Park and Recreation fee. Future developments in the City would also be required to pay Development Impact Fees, Park and Recreation fees, and Quimby fees at the time they are constructed. Impacts are not expected to be cumulatively considerable. Other Public Facilities The proposed Project, along with future development in the City, would increase the demand of other public facilities in La Quinta, due to the increased population. However, the Project does not require the construction of new public facilities and if new public facilities are identified it is expected that such facilities would be subject to CEQA review by the appropriate CEQA lead agency for the project. Therefore, project impacts relating to other public facilities are not cumulatively considerable. 4.14.6 Mitigation Measures PS-1: Travertine Fire Master Plan (FMP) was developed to analyze emergency access to the Project and determine and implement strategies at the Project site to improve RCFD and CAL Fire Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-19 October 2023 613 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES operations and service delivery. The FMP was required to be prepared to address adequate fire protection for the area and mitigate potentially unacceptable response times in the interior of the Project. The FMP further states that conformance to the full circulation plan is required for any additional development beyond Phase 1 of the Project. The later phases of development would include the improvement of Jefferson Street, which would provide emergency access to the Project. Full buildout of the Project is evaluated in this Draft EIR. The Project applicant shall implement the safety measures established in the Travertine Fire Master Plan which include the following: • approved emergency access points; • roadway design standards for fire protection vehicles; • minimum water quantity and pressure necessary for firefighting; All developer plans showing fire system connections shall provide information on the type of fire system that is being installed for the development (e.g., wet -pipe fire sprinkler systems, deluge fire sprinkler systems and dry pipe and precaution fire systems). A fire flow of 2,375 gallons per minute for 2-hour duration at 20 psi shall be required at the Project in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection, with no portion of any lot frontage more than a maximum of 500 feet from the hydrant shall be provided. Minimum fire flow for all residential structures shall be 875 gallons per minute for a 1-hour duration at 20 psi operating pressure. Fire hydrant spacing shall be in accordance with Appendix C of the California Fire Code. Both requirements must be available prior to placing any combustible materials on the job site. The fire system plans shall be submitted to CVWD to review the complexity and type of proposed fire system. PS-2: Adequate fire protection for the area will be ensured through the following enhanced mitigation measures. • Fire Flows and Hydrants: o Consistent with calculation procedure set forth in Appendix B of the California Fire Code, the project is required to ensure a fire flow of 2,375 gallons per minute for 2-hour duration at 20-psi. o For residential areas, an approved standard fire hydrant, located at each intersection, with no portion of any lot frontage more than a maximum of 500- feet from a hydrant shall be provided. o Minimum fire flow for all residential structures shall be 875 gallons per minute for a 1-hour duration at 20-psi operating pressure. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-20 October 2023 614 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES o Fire hydrant spacing shall be in accordance with Appendix C of the current edition of the California Fire Code. o Conforming fire hydrants and flows must be available prior to placing any combustible materials on the job site. • 5A Level Construction Standards: Many buildings will require or benefit from utilizing more than one construction type, which is determined by factors such as code or durability requirements, architectural design, and construction costs. In these cases, portion(s) of the building are separated by construction type with a fire rated wall or horizontal (floor) assembly, allowing each area to be treated as a separate building for meeting building code requirements. For Phase 1, all construction standards are subject to 5A, Type V-A, level building standards. Type V-A refers to uses of protected Wood Frames, commonly used in the construction of newer apartment buildings; there is no exposed wood visible and non-combustible materials are generally used. Non-combustible materials generally include concrete, masonry, and steel building elements while combustible material typically refers to wood framed building elements that do not meet heavy timber requirements. Type A is preferred because it is construction that uses protected — structural members which have additional fire rating coating or cover by means of spray -on, sheetrock, or other approved method that increases the fire resistance rating by at least 1-hour; whereas, Type B is Unprotected — Structural members which have no additional coating or cover. • Emergency Standby Power Facilities for Booster Pumps: The project site will provide adequate space for a diesel fueled standby generator in a recessed concrete structure, to be located at both booster pump locations. The generators shall be sized to operate at connected load (full site load) of the designed station. The installation and testing of this equipment will be performed by CVWD. • Fire Systems/Backflow Requirements: All developer plans showing fire system connections shall provide information on the type of fire system that is being installed for the development (e.g. wet -pipe fire sprinkler systems, deluge fire sprinkler systems and dry pipe and pre -action fire systems). The developer's engineer shall fill out and check the appropriate fire system box on the CVWD Plan Check checklist for domestic water. Upon request for additional information on the fire system, the fire system plans shall be submitted to CVWD to review the complexity and type of proposed fire system so the degree of hazard can be assessed. Because a fire system design can vary, the level of backflow protection will be based on the type of potential cross -connection and the degree of hazard. The three types of backflow protection that will be considered are: (1) Single (lead free) Detector Check, below ground installation; (2) Double Check Detector Assembly (DCDA), above ground installation; and (3) Reduced Pressure Detector Assembly (RPDA), above ground installation. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-21 October 2023 615 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES • Optic -con Sensors at Project Development Gates: The project will provide Opti-con sensors that are strategically located so gates are open when the engines arrive. Precise locations will be determined at the Final Map stage of development. See Exhibit 3.1 Mitigation Diagram for conceptual locations. • Community Emergency Response Team (FEMA) Programs: Community Emergency Response Team (FEMA) Programs providing the community with regular training, coordination and communication. The "Travertine CERT" program will develop and maintain a roster of residents/staff that will collectively and individually support and assist during an emergency event or major disaster. • HOA/Community Training for CPR and AED Training: CPR and AED Training will be coordinated and provided by the HOTA/Community for staff and residents to provide an increased population of informed bystanders that are able to assess and initiate life saving measures while emergency responders are en route. This extends the preservation of life at critical times during a health emergency. • AED Devices: AED devices will be made available at public accessible locations within the community • Additional Community Risk Reduction programs: The HOA/Community shall provide risk reduction programs, including but not limited to Youth Drowning Prevention. 4.14.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation Implementation of Mitigation Measure PS-1 and PS-2 requiring the Travertine Fire Master Plan to be implemented, as well as existing regulations and standards identified above would ensure that the Project's potential impacts associated with public facilities and services related to fire and police emergency and non -emergency services, as well as impacts to schools, would be less than significant. 4.14.8 References 1. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Quimby Act, 2022. 2. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Update, May 2013. 3. City of La Quinta Development Impact Fee Study, August 2019. 4. City of La Quinta / City Departments / Police Department Website 5. City of La Quinta / Parks Website 6. Kohl Hetrick, Fire Safety Specialist La Quinta / Email Correspondence, September 2022 7. Lieutenant Andres Martinez, La Quinta Police Department / Email Correspondence, October 2022 8. Resolution No. 2020-003; Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, City of La Quinta, September 2019; adopted February 2020. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-22 October 2023 616 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES 9. Travertine Fire Master Plan, TRG Land, Inc., 2020. 10. 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 5, 2020. Travertine Draft EIR 4.14-23 October 2023 617 Page intentionally blank 618 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.15 Recreation 4.15 Recreation 4.15.1 Introduction This section describes the existing setting regarding local and regional recreation facilities, lands and opportunities, and the potential effects on parks and recreation associated with implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project ("Specific Plan Amendment", "Project"). Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on population information used in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, of this Draft EIR, the City of La Quinta General Plan, the Desert Recreation District's 2013 Master Plan, and the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District website for information on Lake Cahuilla Regional Park. Sources used in the preparation are included in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. 4.15.2 Existing Conditions The City of La Quinta and other agencies offers a variety of passive and active recreational opportunities for residents and visitors to the region. Developed open space recreational areas within the City include a variety of City -owned and maintained parks and facilities, County -owned parks, Desert Recreation District facilities, and public and private golf courses. In addition, there are approximately 6,933 acres of natural open space areas within the City offering hiking trails, equestrian trails, and other passive recreation opportunities. The City also operates and maintains the La Quinta Senior Center and La Quinta Museum which are located within the Village Build -out Plan. The La Quinta Senior Center provides services such as classes, seminars, special events, and weekly programs to adults 55 years of age and older. The La Quinta Museum provides residents with cultural activities, including art exhibits, programs, and events. The Desert Recreation District provides park facilities and recreation programs throughout the Coachella Valley. Once known as the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District, the Desert Recreation District owns and operates the La Quinta Community Center and is proposing a Discovery Center near Lake Cahuilla. The La Quinta Community Center and Park, located at 77865 Avenida Montezuma, includes a 6.5-acre park and 5,000 square foot community center and includes ball fields, basketball courts, playground, picnic tables, barbecues, restrooms, an outdoor amphitheater, outdoor exercise facilities, and drinking fountains. The Community Center includes the La Quinta Fitness Center, kitchen, and concessions. See Table 4.15-1, Parks within the City of La Quinta, lists the various parks within the City, their acreages, and amenities. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-1 October 2023 619 4.15 RECREATION Table 4.15-1 Parks within the City of La Quinta Facility Location Acres Amenities Lake Cahuilla 58075 Jefferson St., 0.90 miles 710 Camping, 135-acre lake, fishing, Regional Park north of the Project hiking, and horseback riding Cove Oasis Top of the Cove, 3.50 miles 1 Picnic tables and walking paths northwest of the Project connected to hiking trails Velasco Park Calle Temecula, 3.70 miles 0.23 Neighborhood park with northwest of Project playground, grass area, benches Event Park at Southeast corner of Avenue 52 14.0 SilverRock Resort passive park SilverRock and SilverRock Way, 4 miles venue to include parking lot, northwest of the Project. walking paths, turf areas, sloped event lawn, water features, and recreation building Eisenhower Park 53400 Eisenhower Dr., 4 miles 0.46 Neighborhood park with northwest of Project playground, grass area, benches Fritz Burns Park 78107 Avenue 52, 4.50 miles 6.0 Playground, dog park, skate park, northwest of the Project swimming pool, tennis courts, water features, picnic tables La Quinta 77865 Avenida Montezuma, 4.71 Community fitness center, Community Park 4.75 miles northwest of the baseball field, basketball court, Project playground, benches, picnic tables Civic Center 78495 Calle Tampico, 5 miles 17.5 Picnic tables, public art, Campus north of the Project restrooms, walking paths, and water features Sports Complex 78900 Park Avenue, 5.25 miles 16.4 Ball fields, picnic tables, northwest of the Project restrooms Season's Park 78301 Calle Las Ramblas, 5.10 5.0 Playground, grass areas, dog miles northwest of the Project park Saguaro Park Saguaro Road, 5.40 miles 0.24 Playground, benches, grass northwest of the Project areas, tables La Quinta Park 78468 Westward Ho Dr., 7 18.08 Playground, skate park, BBQs, miles northwest of the Project water features, picnic tables, Desert Pride Park Birchcrest Circle, 7.45 miles 1.06 Playground, grass area northwest of the Project Pioneer Park 78695 Miles Ave., 7.6 miles 3.22 Playground, grass areas, dog northwest of Project park, picnic tables, benches Monticello Park Fred Waring Dr., 7.90 miles 3.92 Playground, grass area, benches north of the Project Adams Park 78930 La Palma Dr., 7.90 miles 4.62 Playground, grass field, picnic north of the Project tables, benches Source: La Quinta City Website, "Parks" page, 2021. In addition to the community parks, extensive walking and hiking trails have also been developed within the City of La Quinta. The closest hiking trails to the proposed Project occur west and northwest of the Project site, south of the Cove neighborhood. Table 4.15-2 lists the hiking trails within the City. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-2 October 2023 620 4.15 RECREATION Table 4.15-2 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta Trail Distance from Project Trail Length (Miles) Boo Hoff Trail 0.25 miles west 8.92 Cove to Lake Trail 1.30 miles northwest 2.41 Bear Creek 3.64 miles northwest 4 Source: La Quinta City website, "Hiking" page. Trail locations and length taken from City website. 4.15.3 Regulatory Setting State Quimby Act California passed the Quimby Act in 1975, allowing local governments to pass ordinances requiring developers to set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay in -lieu of fees for the development of new parks and recreational facilities. Local governments have come to depend on the Quimby Act for new facilities, or to upgrade existing facilities, as a result of new growth and development. Section 13.48 of the City's Municipal Code implements this. Local La Quinta Community Services Master Plan La Quinta's Community Services Master Plan serves as an important tool for short to mid-term parks and recreation planning and decision making. The Community Services Master Plan is a five-year plan with a long-range vision that monitors and surveys public needs and current service levels, and in turn provides service recommendations for implementation. The plan includes a community needs survey, details an inventory of existing services and facilities, and presents a comparison to standardized state and national benchmarks. Healthy Eating Active Living Campaign On February 16, 2010, the La Quinta City Council passed Resolution 2010-013, declaring a commitment to improve and encourage community health and wellness through the Healthy Eating Active Living (HEAL) Campaign sponsored by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy. This commitment includes the promotion of policies to help shape the built environment so that it encourages walking, biking, hiking and other forms of physical activity and provides pedestrian connectivity between parks, schools, retail businesses and residential areas. This initiative also includes supporting access to health and fitness facilities such as the La Quinta Fitness Center, promoting healthy eating through farmers markets and community gardening, and encouraging higher nutrition standards at public concessions. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-3 October 2023 621 4.15 RECREATION La Quinta General Plan The Parks and Recreation Element of the La Quinta General Plan provides descriptions of existing parks and recreational facilities, identifies the current and projected demand for parks, and establishes the goals, policies and programs which allow the City to continue to provide a full range of recreational amenities and services to its residents and businesses. The City of La Quinta operates 11 city parks, the Civic Center Campus, and three nature preserve areas. The nature preserves are available for public recreation, as they contain trails for hiking and bicycling. Two regional parks located within the City of La Quinta are managed by other agencies. The 6.5-acre La Quinta Community Park, located in the Village, is managed by the Desert Recreational District, and the 845-acre Lake Cahuilla Regional Park, located in the southwestern portion of the City, is managed by the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District. Lake Cahuilla Regional Park charges a user fee for day visitors, fishing, and overnight camping. La Quinta's recreational activities and events are organized and promoted by the City Community Resources Department, providing the public with opportunities that include organized sports, classes, excursions, and special events. The department also oversees the City's numerous parks and rental facilities, SilverRock Resort, the Senior Center, the Fitness Center, the La Quinta Library, and the La Quinta Museum. Applicable goals and policies established in the La Quinta General Plan regarding Parks and Recreation are as followed: GOAL PR-1: A comprehensive system of parks, and recreation facilities and services that meet the active and passive needs of all residents and visitors. • Policy PR-1.2: Continue to provide a minimum standard of 5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. • Policy PR-1.4 The design and construction of parks and recreational facilities shall comply with all the development standards that apply to privately constructed facilities. • Policy PR-1.6 Encourage patterns of development that promote safe pedestrian and bicycle access to schools, public parks, and recreational areas. • Policy PR-1.8 Promote a healthy and active lifestyle for all residents. Related Goal OS-1: Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreational, environmental, and economic purposes. La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report The La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR) determined that the General Plan would facilitate new residential development throughout the City and increase the population within City Limits. New growth would put pressure on existing facilities if no new recreational facilities are built. The La Quinta General Plan requires the provision of 5 acres of parkland per every 1000 residents. Based Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-4 October 2023 622 4.15 RECREATION on this standard, a population of 79,956 at buildout would require a total of 395 acres of parkland. The City currently has approximately 806.44 acres of public parks within its boundaries. La Quinta Municipal Code La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.48 establishes criteria for dedicating land, or payment of in lieu fees for construction of new parks or recreational facilities or rehabilitation of existing facilities. The ordinance states that residential subdivisions, containing less than five parcels, and nonresidential subdivisions, are exempt from dedication or park fees. All other residential developments are required to pay a park development fee, dedicate land, or both. Section 13.48.050 states that parkland dedication requirements shall equal three acres of parkland per one thousand people in a new subdivision. The number of people in a new subdivision is determined by multiplying the number of dwelling units in the subdivision by the average household size. Average household size is based on the latest U.S. Census information. Based on the U.S. Census information, the average household size in the City is 2.55 people. The Project proposes 1,200 dwelling units, generating 3,060 residents in the Project. Thus, the Project shall provide 9.18 acres of parkland at full buildout. Residential development, as a permitted land use of the Village Commercial designation, would be subject to Quimby fees. 4.15.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The thresholds derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines are used to determine the level of potential effect. The proposed Project would have a significant effect on recreational facilities if it is determined that the Project will: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Project Recreational Features Travertine will offer a range of park and open space amenities that will be accessible to Project homeowners and the public. Neighborhood and community parks, trails, and a central private spine trail that bisects the residential areas of the property will be accessible to the Project residents; while the 5- mile-long public Grand Loop Trail that will be developed around the perimeter of the Project site will be accessible to the public from Avenue 62 and separated from the proposed planning areas by perimeter fencing. A skills golf course and golf academy with club facilities, including banquet facilities and wellness facility, will be open to Project residents and guests, other La Quinta residents, and the general public. Exhibit 4.15-1, Recreation Plan (Exhibit 2.2 in Travertine Specific Plan Amendment), shows the location Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-5 October 2023 623 4.15 RECREATION of the recreational trails, trailheads, parks, and open space areas proposed by the Project. The table below indicates the public and private recreational areas proposed for the Project. Table 4.15-3 Private and Public Recreational Facilities Planning Area Public/Private Proposed Use Approximate Acreage Approximate Length 11 Public 4-Hole Practice Facility 8.6 AC - 11 Public Banquet Facility and Restaurant 2.6 AC - 11 Public Parking for 4-Hole Practice Facility and Banquet 6. AC - 11 Public Golf Academy 2.7 AC - - Public Trails 6.4 AC 4.4 Mi 19 Public Staging Area 0.9 AC - 5 Private Community East Park 8.8 AC - 13 Private Community West Park 4.6 AC - - Private Trails 7.7 AC 5.3 Mi 7 Private Center Strolling Garden 2.4 AC - Totals 48.3 AC 9.7 MILES Recreational Trails Exhibit 4.15-1, Recreational Plan, illustrates a network of trails suitable for pedestrian and bicyclist use planned throughout the community. The core of the network is a community spine trail, which provides a direct link to the community open space and gathering areas, as well as passive and active spaces. The system also provides private internal interconnecting trails and strolling trails, and on -street (Class II) bike trails. There is one proposed staging area located to the south of the extension of Avenue 62 in Planning Area 19 that will provide parking and access to the 5-mile public trail (the Community Grand Loop Trail) that circumnavigates the development area. The Grand Loop Trail will be 12 feet wide and consist of compacted and screened desert soil. Disturbed areas around the trail will consist of native soil and native seeding on disturbed areas. A variety of amenities are provided along the trails, including rest stops, and interpretive signage that serve to further enhance the natural experience afforded by the trail network. Community Parks Community parks are proposed at each end of the spine trail and will provide turf in limited areas for recreation and play. Shade trees, benches and picnic areas, tot lots, and dog parks will make these passive parks enjoyable space for the residents to meet. The community parks will supplement the private parks located within the individual residential developments. A community clubhouse is proposed for the community park north of Jefferson Street. The community parks will be connected by a spine trail. This trail will be 10 feet wide and will accommodate pedestrians and cyclists to provide off- street access to the community amenities. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-6 October 2023 624 4.15 RECREATION Neighborhood Parks Smaller neighborhood parks are also proposed within the Project area. These neighborhood parks will be private and located within the individual residential developments. Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities In addition to the Open Space land uses proposed for the Project site, a resort and wellness spa are planned for an approximately 38.3-acre site located at the northwest entrance to the Project, from Jefferson Street in Planning Area 1. This area will consist of resort related amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities; tennis, yoga, walking and hiking trails. A resort and golf training facility with related amenities is proposed to be located near the southeastern entry to the Project on approximately 46.2-acres in Planning Area 11. This will provide a high -end practice facility, golf clubhouse, and banquet facility restaurant (500-seat capacity) for residents and guests. The development of the various recreational features will allow the Project to achieve the following Specific Plan Amendment objectives which includes: • Providing an interpretive trail element that circumnavigates the Project and identifies the unique features both historical and current within the Project setting. • Providing a comprehensive system of parks and recreation facilities and services that meet the active and passive needs of all residents and visitors. • Contributing to the preservation, conservation and management of open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreation, environmental, and economic purposes. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-7 October 2023 625 J3()Crh fFF�J�AIL P • � • JEFFEPMLY4 _" L' _ '-7z.LM1 ---_—� r I L + i a r_ rl � • k M1 ''I �•� . F- i, I ti �' .�1 .1�1 �•w i �' Y LCllgkp �y •J 1 iSr L�•' I I PARK EAST dl AAT kS% , T rl h y"" "xp I y� . •,•, ..F � I Irk '�tC^11 Ero-J-Mo l Tard y hlem- mdn. T-ai Cped Su:t %dam `7-7% U wwiA yGwALcop T?ia %--'�.I %m IISM.1rai. 5U+}R+tl �I �� Opcn spiv ' F.La�78na1 i_ _y _. :+a�etar Source: TRG Land, Inc. MA. -CONSULTING, I NC- RECREATION PLAN �i,L!Nr,IhJ� } M tlai'Il'4F�R:!gt'm I.r..;'I I 1:'Ia�, TRAVEI NE EXHIBIT 5-1 4.15 RECREATION Project Impacts a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The amended Travertine Project would facilitate new development and would result in approximately 1,200 new residential units. According to the Project -specific VMT Evaluation, the total added population of the Project would be 3,250 new residents. According to the La Quinta General Plan Housing Element, the City of La Quinta's total population was approximately 40,704 in 2018. The City of La Quinta's General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) forecasts a population of 46,297 people by year 2035. This population includes the buildout of the previous Travertine Specific Plan, which proposed 2,300 dwelling units onsite. Therefore, the proposed Specific Plan Amendment would be a substantial reduction in demand for existing local and regional park and recreation resources. The La Quinta Municipal Code (Chapter 13.48) requires the provision of three (3) acres of parkland set aside for each 1,000 residents. In order to calculate the number of parkland acres required, the number of dwelling units in a new subdivision is multiplied by the average household size (based on the latest U.S. Census information). Per the U.S. Census, the average household size in La Quinta is 2.55 persons, which would result in a population of 3,0601. Therefore, pursuant to the La Quinta Municipal Code build - out of the proposed Project would require a total of 9.18 acres of parkland. The Project proposes private and public recreational uses including neighborhood and community parks, trails, and a central private spine trail that bisects the residential areas of the property will be accessible to the Project residents. Additionally, an approximately 5-mile-long public Grand Loop Trail will be developed around the perimeter of the Project site and will be accessible to the public from Avenue 62 and separated from the proposed planning areas by perimeter fencing. Pedestrian walkways, strolling trails, and an intra-connector trail will be located throughout the site, in addition to private picnic tables and barbeques. These private facilities occupy approximately 23.5 acres of the Project'. The public golf practice facilities (including golf academy, driving range, and putting course), and staging facilities for the public regional interpretive trail will encompass approximately 27.2 acres of the Project. Thus, the Project will provide 7.68 acres of private parkland per 1,000 residents, and 8.89 acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents, for a combined total of 16.57 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (in compliance with Section 13.48.050). The Project would provide approximately 16.57 acres of park land per 1,000 1 Note this population number is less than the population value analyzed throughout. Based on the VMT Evaluation, the Project would result in a population of 3,250 residents. This is more than the 2.55 persons per household value for the City of La Quinta and therefore provides a conservative figure. However, because Section 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code requires the parkland value be determined with U.S. Census data of persons per household, this discussion utilized that number. Z This number does not include the potential for pocket and neighborhood parks, dependent on developer design for the residential community. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-9 October 2023 627 4.15 RECREATION residents, thereby exceeding both the City's Municipal Code policy of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents and the 5 acres per 1,000 residents goal set out in the General Plan GOAL PR-1. In accordance with the Quimby Act all new development and redevelopment projects will be required to pay development impact fees directed towards the preservation, expansion and maintenance with the City's recreational parks and facilities, and contribute to new parkland acquisition. Additionally, the City of La Quinta has established Development Impact Fees (DIF) for Parks/Recreation and Park Maintenance Facilities that apply to residential projects only. The DIF for Parks/Recreation is currently $2,106 per dwelling unit for Single Family Detached, and $1,794 per dwelling unit for Single Family Attached, according to the City's Development Impact Fee Study, adopted February 2020. New residential developments, including the proposed Project, would be required to pay the most up-to-date development impact fees to existing parks and City. The payment of the fees will assure that new park expansion is funded and assists in maintaining consistency with Policy PR-1.2 of the City of La Quinta General Plan (Parks, Recreation and Trails Element Goals, Policies and Programs). As previously stated, while Project impacts are expected to be less than significant, the Project's payment of Quimby Act Fees and City DIF would constitute a net benefit for City and regional parks and recreation facilities. b. Requires the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment The Project would include a range of community park and recreational facilities throughout the development which would consist of amenities accessible to neighborhood homeowners, and some of which will also be accessible by the public. As stated previously, amenities that will be available to the general public include: the 5-mile-long public Grand Loop Trail that will be developed around the perimeter of the Project site; a central private spine trail that bisects the recreational areas of the property; certain on -street bike paths; and the preservation of natural open space. The Grand Loop perimeter trail will also expand public opportunities for access to trails and open space. Park and recreational amenities specifically for use by Travertine residents and guests include private parks located within the residential communities, a skills golf facility and driving range, entertainment and wedding gardens. These recreational amenities are incorporated throughout the Project site and would be constructed in congruence with the Project phases. The proposed recreational facilities are designed as an integral part of the overall Travertine design, and will not result in any significant adverse physical effects on the environment. The proposed community and neighborhood parks would be developed following sound engineering and design standards for park facilities, recreation and open space amenities. The construction of Project design features associated with recreational uses are anticipated to have short-term construction impacts associated with construction -related air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation. However, these construction impacts would result in less than Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-10 October 2023 628 4.15 RECREATION significant impacts. (See Sections 4.2, Air Quality, 4.6, Energy Resources, 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, 4.12, Noise, 4.16, Transportation, for analysis of the Project's impact on the environment related to these topics.) The private and public trails are proposed to provide services that meet the active and passive needs of the residents and visitors, and at the same time contribute to the preservation, conservation and management of open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreation, environmental, as stated in the Project objectives. Approximately 301.2 acres in Planning Area 20 is proposed to remain as natural open space, and will not be developed, apart from the proposed water reservoirs and associated infrastructure. Overall, the construction and operation of the proposed Project's parks spaces, recreational facilities and open space amenities would result in less than significant impacts. 4.15.5 Cumulative Impacts Continued growth in the City and regional population would increase demand on City and regional parks and accessible open space areas. The Project alone would increase permanent and tourist populations. However, the Project also proposes approximately 27.2 acres of public recreational facilities, including a 5-mile trail, and approximately 23.5 acres of private recreational facilities. Additionally, the Project will be required to comply with the City's Development Impact Fees which includes a Park and Recreation fee. Future developments in the City would also be required to pay Development Impact Fees and Park and Recreation fees at the time they are constructed. For the above reasons, impacts are not expected to be cumulatively considerable. 4.15.6 Mitigation Measures and Regulatory Requirements Mitigation Measures are not required. 4.15.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation Implementation of existing regulations and standards identified above would ensure that the Project's potential impacts associated with recreational facilities would be less than significant. 4.15.8 References 1. La Quinta City Website, Hiking, available at https://www.playinlaguinta.com/see-do/hiking/ 2. Lake Cahuilla Veterans Regional Park, Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District, available at https://www.rivcoparks.org/lake-cahuilla-veterans-regional-par 3. Resolution 2020 — 003, Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, September 2019, adopted February 2020, available at https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument?id=43794. Travertine Draft EIR 4.15-11 October 2023 629 Page intentionally blank 630 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.16 Transportation 4.16 Transportation 4.16.1 Introduction This section describes the existing setting, potential Project impacts to the area roadway network, and proposed improvements to intersections and roadways and other mitigation required for the implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan ("SP" or "Project"). This evaluation is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)l and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis', as well as the 2035 La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element. The TIA and VMT Analysis are found in Appendix M.1 and M.2 of this Draft EIR. Pursuant to Section 15064.3 of CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant environmental impact. Generally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts for CEQA purposes and refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Nonetheless, the City continues to use the level of service (LOS) analysis to evaluate project consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element and to evaluate future road network operations and to identify improvements that will be needed to address project and other development impacts. The Project TIA was prepared in accordance with the City of La Quinta's Traffic Study Guidelines (Engineering Bulletin #06-13, dated July 23, 2015) and Engineering Bulletin #10-01 (dated August 9, 2010), as well as the City's Vehicle Miles Traveled Policy (June 2021). 4.16.2 Existing Conditions Environmental Setting The proposed Project property consists of approximately 855 acres generally bounded by the extension of Avenue 60 on the north; the extension of Avenue 64 to the south; CVWD Dike No. 4 on the east; and the extension of Jefferson Street on the west. Currently, only dirt roads provide access to the Project property, including the extension of Avenue 62 westward beyond Dike 4 and the future approximate alignment of Jefferson Street south of improved Avenue 54. Regional access to the property and vicinity is provided by US Interstate 10, Highways 111 and 86, Avenue 58, Jefferson Street, Madison Street, Monroe Street, Avenue 62 and other major arterials. Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads, Inc. September 27, 2021). Travertine Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis (Urban Crossroads, Inc. September 27, 2021) Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-1 October 2023 631 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Existing Roadway Facilities A network of roadway segments and intersections, both existing and planned, will be affected by the proposed Project. Each of these roadways and their current and planned improvements are briefly discussed below. The proposed Travertine mixed -use Project property consists of approximately 855 acres generally bounded by the extension of Avenue 60 on the north; the extension of Avenue 64 to the south; CVWD Dike No. 4 on the east; and the extension of Jefferson Street on the west. Vehicular access to the Project property is provided by existing unpaved/unmaintained roads extending southerly from Avenue 58 and westerly from the existing westerly terminus of Avenue 62. Avenue 62 is currently a paved road that terminates at the easterly toe of CVWD's Dike No. 4 levee, where it becomes an unpaved road, primarily used by CVWD to access the impoundment area/recharge basins located on the west side of Dike No. 4. Regional access to the Project property is provided by Interstate 10, Highway 111, Jefferson Street, Avenue 62, and other major arterials. Existing Roadway (2019) Standards and Conditions Avenue 60: This east -west roadway is designated as a Secondary Arterial between the levee and Monroe Street within the study area and at buildout will provide a divided roadway with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 102-foot right-of-way. East of Monroe Street, Avenue 60 is a Primary Arterial with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 108-foot right-of-way. From Madison Street to Monroe Street, Avenue 60 currently has 4 lanes, but other sections have 2 lanes Avenue 62: Avenue 62 is designated as a two-lane Modified Secondary roadway. Avenue 62 is currently an east/west paved roadway with two lanes and no curb or gutter. It terminates at the foot of the CVWD Dike No. 4. where it turns into a dirt roadway as it enters the site. Avenue 62 is planned to include a Class II bike lane. Avenue 58: This east -west roadway is designated as a Secondary Arterial within the study area and at buildout will provide a divided roadway with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 102-foot right-of-way. Existing segments have two to four total lanes. Monroe Street: This north -south street is designated as a Primary Arterial north of Avenue 60 in the study area with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 108-foot right-of-way. South of Avenue 60, Monroe Street is designated as a Secondary Arterial within the study area and at buildout will provide a divided roadway with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 102-foot right-of-way. Two to three lanes (total) exist on Monroe Street in the study area. Jefferson Street: Jefferson Street south of Avenue 58 is designated as a two-lane Modified Secondary. Jefferson Street, north of the Project, is a roughly north/south roadway segment and paved with two Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-2 October 2023 632 4.16 TRANSPORTATION lanes and no curb or gutter. Jefferson street currently turns northwest at Quarry Lane. A dirt roadway extends from this turn, south into the Project property. No paving exists within the Project limits. Jackson Street: This north -south street is designated as a Primary Arterial in the study area with four travel lanes and full parkway within a 108-foot right-of-way. It is currently paved with two lanes and no curb or gutter in the Project area. Existing Intersection Level of Service Existing peak hour traffic operations were evaluated for the study area intersections as shown in Table 4.16-1, Intersection Analysis for Existing (2019) Intersection Operations. Existing peak hour traffic operations were evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies. The existing operations analysis results indicate that all of the 19 existing study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) during the peak hours. Table 4.16-1 Intersection Analysis for Existing (2019) Intersection Operations (With Seasonal Factor Adiustment) ID Intersection Traffic Control' Delay (in seconds)' Level of Service' AM PM AM PM 1 Madison St. / Avenue 58 AWS 8.5 9.3 A A 2 Madison St. / Airport Blvd. TS 9.9 8.4 A A 3 Madison St. / Avenue 54 AWS 12.9 15.9 B C 4 Madison St. / Avenue 52 TS 27.9 28.5 C C 5 Madison St. / Avenue 50 TS 28.6 29.4 C C 6 Jefferson St. / Avenue 54 AWS 12.2 16.9 B C 7 Jefferson St. / Avenue 52 RDB 9.4 9.7 A A 8 Jefferson St. / Avenue 50 TS 46.3 49.4 D D 9 Monroe St. / Avenue 62 AWS 7.5 8.0 A A 10 Monroe St. / Avenue 60 AWS 8.1 8.3 A A 11 Monroe St. / Avenue 58 AWS 8.1 9.4 A A 12 Monroe St. / Airport Blvd. AWS 8.5 9.2 A A 13 Monroe St. / Avenue 54 AWS 14.3 12.7 B B 14 Monroe St. / Avenue 52 AWS 15.4 27.1 C D 15 Monroe St. / 50th Avenue TS 16.6 18.0 B B 16 Jackson St. / Avenue 62 AWS 7.4 7.6 A A 17 Jackson St. / Avenue 60 AWS 7.3 7.7 A A 18 Jackson St. / 58th Avenue AWS 7.5 8.2 A A 19 Jackson St. / Airport Blvd. AWS 8.1 8.6 A A 20 Jefferson St. / N. Loop Intersection Does Not Exist 21 Jefferson St. / S. Loop Intersection Does Not Exist Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 1-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. Notes: 1. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 61" Addition (HCM6) , overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS). 2. TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -street Stop; AWS = All -Way Stop; RDB = Roundabout Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-3 October 2023 633 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 3. A potentially significant project traffic impact is defined to occur at any signalized intersection if the intersection is operating at LOS E and the project causes the delay to increase by 2 seconds of more. If the signalized intersection is operating at LOS F, a potentially significant project specific traffic impact is defined to occur if the intersection is operating at LOS F on the side street and the addition of project traffic results in an increase of 3 seconds or more of delay for any movement. Existing Roadway Volumes Summary Traffic Signal Warrants for existing traffic conditions indicate that, based on existing peak hour intersection volumes, the following 4 unsignalized study area intersections currently warrant a traffic signal. Traffic signal warrants for Existing traffic conditions are based on existing peak hour intersection turning volumes. Based on the peak hour volume -based Warrant #3 of the 2012 Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), as amended for use in California, the following 4 unsignalized study area intersections that currently warrant a traffic signal without the Project: • Madison Street at Avenue 54 (#3) • Jefferson Street at Avenue 54 (#6) • Monroe Street at Avenue 54 (#13) • Monroe Street at Avenue 52 (#14) Table 4.16-2 indicates that all existing study roadway segments are currently operating with acceptable levels. Table 4.16-2 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing (2019) Conditions (With Seasonal Factor Adjustment) Roadway Segment Roadwy Designation Through Travel Lanes' Capacityz ADT3 Capacity Ratio West of Madison St. Secondary 3 21,0004 1,600 0.08 2 14,0006 1,600 Ave 58 West of Monroe St. Secondary 4 28,000 2,300 0.08 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 1,800 0.13 Madison St. South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 6,700 0.16 60th Ave West of Jackson St. Primary 2 19,0005 1,200 0.06 Ave 62 West of Monroe St. Modified Secondary 2 19,000 600 0.03 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 1,700 0.12 South of Ave 60 Secondary 2 14,0004 1,600 0.11 Monroe St. South of Ave 58 Primary 2 19,0005 2,700 0.14 South of Ave 56 Primary 3 31,9506 3,400 0.11 Jackson St. South of Airport BI Primary 2 19,OOO5 2,400 0.13 Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-4 October 2023 634 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 2-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. Notes: 1. Existing Number of Through lanes. 2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (July 2015). 3. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day. 4. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Secondary capacity. 5. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Primary capacity. 6. Estimated capacity for 2-lane Primary. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-5 October 2023 635 CITY OF LA QUINTA IOU NTY OF RIVERSIDE Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc. A. CONSULTING, IN C. } ���N'N� } � iVl. ?!Jr:•�l�I�FI:J��j��titi5Cy�.l9�oi'I�{;i LEGEND: =Exl5TlN d ANALr�l5 La.4Tl0l J) = FtJ70RE ANALM LUCATION - -- - = FUTURE ROADWAY I DIRT — — — — — =EMERtENCY VEHICULAR ACC 5S (EVA- TIA STUDY AREA TRAVE�J�NE EXHIBIT 6-1 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 4.16.3 Regulatory Setting State Regulations SB 743 Senate Bill (SB) 743, adopted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code Section 21099, amended CEQA to state that automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant environmental impact. SB 743 also directed the California Natural Resources Agency to amend the State CEQA Guidelines to address how the significance of transportation impacts should be determined as part of a CEQA analysis. The legislative intent of SB 743 was to balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals for infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The State CEQA Guidelines were amended in 2018 to include guidance on determining the significance of transportation impacts. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the applicable metric in the CEQA guidelines for transportation impacts is generally Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT methodology considers the degree to which the Project will increase existing vehicle miles traveled in the Project study area. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the California Department of Transportation have also released technical guidance on the implementation of SB 743 and the VMT methodology. SB 375 SB 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) directs the California Air Resources Board to set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. SB 375 has three major components: (1) using the regional transportation planning process to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions consistent with AB 32's goals; (2) offering CEQA incentives to encourage projects that are consistent with a regional plan that achieves greenhouse gas emission reductions; and (3) coordinating the regional housing needs allocation process with the regional transportation process while maintaining local authority over land use decisions. See more discussion under Congestion Management Plan. Regional and Local Setting Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Transportation and Improvement Program Government Code section 65080 et seq., state that Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) must prepare and adopt a long-range transportation plan, such as a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system, including but not limited to mass transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle, pedestrian, goods movement and aviation facilities and services. The plan must be action -oriented and pragmatic, considering both the short-term and long-term planning, and shall present clear, concise policy guidance to local and Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-7 October 2023 637 4.16 TRANSPORTATION state officials. Each transportation planning agency must consider and incorporate, as appropriate, the transportation plans of cities, counties, districts, private organizations and State and federal agencies. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the MPO for the project region. The SCAG RTP is a multi -modal long-range planning document, developed in coordination with federal, State, and other regional, sub -regional, and local agencies in southern California. The SCAG RTP, prepared every three years, addresses future needs based on a 20-year projection. It includes programs and policies for congestion management, transit, bicycles, pedestrians, roadways, freight, and finances. It is intended to be used as a long-range plan for federally funded transportation projects. Currently, regional projects are programmed in the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), while locally funded projects (off the State Highway System) are identified in local agency Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs). To comply with Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Statutes, regional CIP requirements are identified through the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) RTIP development process. Projects in the local CIPs may be incorporated into the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) for the programming of Flexible Congestion Relief (FCR) and Urban and Commuter Rail funds. Congestion Management Program The Congestion Management Program (CMP) is intended to link land use, transportation, and air quality with reasonable growth management methods, strategies and programs that effectively utilize new transportation funds to alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts. The RCTC is the designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA) that prepares the Riverside County Congestion Management Program updates in consultation with local agencies, the County of Riverside, transit agencies and sub -regional agencies like the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). SB 375 requires each Metropolitan Planning Organization agency to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy in conjunction with its Regional Transportation Plan. The Sustainable Communities Strategy aligns land use and transportation planning assumptions to ensure attainment of state -mandated regional greenhouse gas emissions targets. The RCTC has designated a system of highways and roadways to include (at a minimum) all State Highway facilities within Riverside County and a system of principal arterials as the Congestion Management System (CMS). All State Highways within Riverside County have been designated as part of the CMP System of Highways and Roadways. The following facilities are designated as part of the Riverside CMP System of Highways and Roadways in the Coachella Valley: • 1-10 (San Bernardino County line to State line) • SR 111 (1-10 to Imperial County line) • Ramon Road (1-10 to SR 111) Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-8 October 2023 638 4.16 TRANSPORTATION • Monterey Avenue (1-10 to SR 111) The Riverside County Long Range Transportation Study indicates that most local agencies in Riverside County and Caltrans have adopted peak hour Level of Service (LOS) standards of "C" or "D" to maintain a desired LOS for the local circulation system. To address CMP requirements RCTC approved a minimum traffic LOS standard of "E" has been adopted. Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Program The CVAG administers the Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Program, which allocates Measure A and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) funds for necessary improvements to the regional transportation system. Measure A, approved by Riverside County voters in 1988, approved a half -cent increase in sales tax over a 20-year period to be used for transportation purposes. In November 2002, Riverside County voters approved a 30-year extension of Measure "A" (2009-2039). Measure A funds contribute a portion of the cost of transportation system improvements projected to be needed over the next 25 years. To conform to CVAG policies, all CVAG member agencies, including the City of La Quinta, are required to construct adopted standard road improvements for missing regional roads segments located adjacent to land development projects. City of La Quinta City of La Quinta General Plan The City has adopted LOS D as the minimum acceptable standard for intersection analysis. A significant traffic impact occurs if the addition of project -generated trips causes an intersection to change from an acceptable LOS to a deficient LOS, or if project traffic increases the delay at any intersection already operating at an unacceptable LOS. The City has adopted LOS D or maximum volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 as the minimum acceptable standard during peak operating periods for roadway segment analysis. La Quinta Capital Improvement Program The City's 5-year CIP identifies costs of needed capital improvements and coordinates financing and timing that maximizes benefit to the public. The purpose of the CIP is to provide the City with a long- range program for major municipal capital construction projects based on the systematic development of and accompanying financial plan. The CIP includes roadway improvements and traffic signal installation and upgrades, as well as other City projects. Area Roadway System Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-9 October 2023 639 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Roads within the Study Area are a combination of Primary Arterials (Madison Street, Avenue 52, Airport Boulevard,) and Secondary Arterials (Avenue 58, Avenue 60.) For purposes of the TIA Local and Collector streets that feed into the larger roadways are not included in the Study Area as their numbers are already factored into traffic on the larger Arterial and Secondary Roadways. Pedestrian and Alternative Facilities There are existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the study area along sections of Jefferson Street, Madison Street, Monroe Street, Avenue 50, Avenue 52, Avenue 54, Airport Boulevard, and Avenue 58. The City also plans to develop golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV) paths that would connect with a number of existing pedestrian/bicycle multi -purpose paths. The City's General Plan Update 2035 Future Buildout Golf Cart/Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Paths exhibit identifies future Class I golf cart/NEV path and multi -purpose trails along Jefferson Street from Avenue 50 to Avenue 54. Jefferson Street south of Avenue 58 along with sections of Madison Street, Monroe Street, Jackson Street, Avenue 50, Avenue 52, Avenue 54, Airport Boulevard, Avenue 58 and Avenue 60, are planned to be a Class II Golf Cart/NEV path and multi -use path. 4.16.4 Project Impact Analysis Proposed Project The construction of off -site improvements will be temporary and will end once discrete construction of the individual facilities is complete. This includes completion of the IID substation connection and all off -site roadway improvements. The Project is proposed to be served by the Project access locations listed below (see Exhibit 4.16-1, TIA Study Area) and includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA): • #1 Avenue 62 • #2 Jefferson Street • Emergency vehicle access (EVA) is provided at Madison Street (from the northerly boundary of the Project's Planning Area 18 to Avenue 60.) • GPA: The termination of Madison Street as a General Plan Roadway south of Avenue 60. Project Design Features • The Project will implement marketing strategies to optimize interaction between on -site resort and residential uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip reduction strategies. Marketing strategies will include: ■ Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities ■ Event promotions Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-10 October 2023 640 4.16 TRANSPORTATION ■ Publications Thresholds of Significance The following thresholds are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effect. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan would have a significant effect on Transportation if it is determined that the Project will: a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access? Methodology La Quinta's Vehicle Miles Traveled Policy La Quinta's Vehicle Miles Traveled Policy (Policy) adopted in June 2020 and revised in July 2021. This Policy aligns the City's transportation analysis with California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and establishes the thresholds for transportation impacts under CEQA by introducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT.) As required by SB 743, VMT replaces the former metric used to analyze traffic impacts under CEQA, which was LOS. The City of La Quinta utilizes the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA 2018) guidance to establish thresholds for significance for use in CEQA analysis as provided for in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 and provided options for mitigation for projects within their jurisdiction. The City continues to utilize the LOS metric to analyze project consistency with the General Plan. The methodology for transportation LOS analysis is included in Engineering Bulletin 06- 13. VMT The Project -specific VMT Analysis was prepared based on the adopted City Guidelines. As outlined in the La Quinta Guidelines, a Mixed -Use project such as the proposed Project, which includes both residential and non-residential uses, has each type of use analyzed independently, applying the following significance thresholds for each land use component: • For Residential Uses, VMT per resident exceeding a level of: (1) 15 percent below the Citywide per resident VMT OR (2) 15 percent below regional VMT per resident, whichever is more stringent. • For Retail Uses (Includes Hotels), a net increase in the total existing VMT for the region. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-11 October 2023 641 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Level of Service The addition of Project -generated trips has the potential to cause an intersection to change from an acceptable LOS to a deficient LOS, or Project traffic may increase the delay at any intersection already operating at an unacceptable LOS, or if it causes the LOS to change from an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) to a deficient LOS (LOS E or worse) or increase delay/density on a facility operating at an unacceptable level the Project can be considered not consistent with the City's Circulation Element. The City General Plan establishes LOS D as the minimum acceptable standard during peak operating periods for roadway segments and intersections. Currently, LOS analysis provides information regarding roadway segment and intersection capacity and General Plan consistency for City transportation planning efforts. As discussed above, vehicle delay as measured solely by LOS or similar congestion -based standards does not constitute an environmental impact under CEQA. Therefore, the roadway segment and intersection LOS analysis is provided here was undertaken to demonstrate Project consistency with the General Plan planning assumptions and policies. The EIR does not use the LOS metric to determine the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA, consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. Signal Warrants A signal warrant defines the minimum condition under which the installation of a traffic signal might be warranted. Meeting this threshold condition does not require that a traffic control signal be installed at a particular location, but rather, that other traffic factors and conditions should be evaluated to determine whether the signal is truly justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not necessarily correlate with level of service. An intersection may satisfy a signal warrant condition and operate at or above LOS "D" or operate below LOS "D" and not meet a signal warrant. Traffic Impact Analysis The Travertine Specific Plan Traffic ImpactAnalysis (TIA) is based upon an analysis of existing roadway and intersection conditions in the Project vicinity and current traffic volumes, General Plan roadway classification, and other data and information. The TIA provides documentation and analysis of existing traffic conditions, trips generated by the Project property, distribution of the Project trips to roads outside the Project property, and projected future traffic conditions. The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected on August 15t", 2017, April 9t", 2019, May 7t", 2019 and September 1, 2019. The following peak hours were selected for analysis: • Weekday AM Peak Hour (peak hour between 6:00 AM and 8:30 AM) • Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 2:30 PM and 5:30 PM) There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activities that would prevent or limit roadway access or detour Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-12 October 2023 642 4.16 TRANSPORTATION routes. The average AM/PM peak hour intersection growth over the 2-year period between 2017 and 2019 counts data at selected study area and nearby intersections is approximately 2.66%. The additional 2.66% growth rate is applied to the study area intersections with 2017 counts to reflect 2019 conditions where 2019 counts were not available. The raw traffic count data was adjusted to maintain flow conservation between applicable study area intersections (i.e., no unexplained loss of vehicles between no or limited access intersections). As noted in the introduction to this discussion, the TIA was prepared in accordance with the City of La Quinta's Traffic Study Guidelines and in consultation with City staff during the scoping process. The analysis also considered the General Plan roadway classifications and policies. Project trips were generated based on the rates collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017. The TIA study area is illustrated in Exhibit 4.16-1. Level of Service (LOS) is a measure of transportation system performance based upon the ratio of traffic volume relative to the capacity of the roadway or intersection. The volume -to -capacity ratio (V/C) indicates the overall performance of the roadway segment or intersection and corresponds to a rating of A through F identifying its level of capacity utilization and relative level of congestion. LOS A represents free -flow traffic with little or no delay whereas LOS F represents a breakdown of traffic flow and a high incidence of delay. The volume -to -capacity ratio (V/C) is utilized to indicate the overall projected performance of the roadway segment or intersection. Table 4.16-3 illustrates the LOS description for roadway segments. Table 4.16-3 Roadway Segment Level of Service Description Mid -Link and Uninterrupted Flow Level of Service Volume/Capacity Ratio A 0.00 — 0.60 B 0.61— 0.70 C 0.71— 0.80 D 0.81— 0.90 E 0.91— 1.00 F Not Meaningful Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board — Special Report 209, National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C. 2000. Intersection LOS is a measure of the flow of traffic through a given intersection and is based on the number of seconds the vehicle is delayed in passing through the intersection. As the LOS decreases some travelers familiar with network constraints will seek alternative paths and traffic will be distributed to those parts of the network with surplus capacity. Table 4.16-4 illustrates the LOS description for roadway Intersections. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-13 October 2023 643 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-4 Intersection Level of Service Thresholds Level of Service Intersection Control Delay (Seconds / Vehicle) Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection A <_ 10.0 <_ 10.0 B > 10.0to:520.0 > 10.0to:5 15.0 C > 20.0 to :5 35.0 > 15.0 to:5 25.0 D >35.0to<_55.0 >25.0to<_35.0 E > 55.0 to :5 80.0 > 35.0 to:5 50.0 F >80.0 >50.0 Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition.) The City has defined Level of Service "D" as the minimum acceptable intersection service level during peak hours for planning and design purposes. Signalized Intersections The City of La Quinta requires signalized intersection operations analysis based on the methodology described in Chapter 18 and Chapter 31 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010. As noted above, intersection LOS operations are based on an intersection's average control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move -up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections LOS is directly related to the average control delay per vehicle. The LOS analysis for signalized intersections was performed using optimized signal timing for existing traffic conditions. Signal timing optimization was considered for pedestrian safety and signal coordination requirements. Signal timing information for study area intersections were secured and analyzed. Where signal timing was unavailable, the local accepted standards were utilized in lieu of actual signal timing. Modal Split Although the use of public transit, walking, and/or bicycling have the potential to reduce Project - related traffic, such reductions have not been taken into considerations in this traffic study in order to provide a conservative analysis of the Project's potential to add traffic at study area analysis locations. TIA Analysis Scenarios In accordance with the City of La Quinta's Traffic Study Guidelines, the TIA analyzed the following scenarios: • Existing (2019) Conditions • Existing Plus Project Conditions (E+P) • Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects with and without Project for each of the following Phases: o Project Phase 1 Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-14 October 2023 644 4.16 TRANSPORTATION o Project Phase 2 (with Jefferson Street connection to Avenue 58) o Project Phase 3 (Phase 3, With Jefferson Street connection to Avenue 58) • Year 2040 (General Plan Buildout) Conditions without Madison Street extension (GPA) and with Jefferson Street connection to Avenue 58. Full buildout of the Project will include 758 single family detached residential homes, 442 duplex residential units, a 100-room resort hotel, and other resort/golf facilities. The resort/golf facilities would consist of golf practice (4-holes) and driving range, golf academy, banquet facility and restaurant, and passive outdoor use on slopes. The anticipated construction phase completion dates are as follows: • Phase 1: 2026 • Phase 2: 2029 • Phase 3 Buildout: 2031 The following peak hours were selected for this analysis: • Weekday AM peak (peak hour between 6:00 am -8:30 am) • Weekday PM peak (peak hour between 2:30 pm -5:30 pm) The study area included in the TIA is shown in Exhibit 4.16-5, TIA Intersection Analysis Locations, and consists of 21 intersections. The TIA study area included 11 roadways segments as shown in Table 4.16-6, Roadway Segment Analysis Locations. Intersecting streets are characterized as north -south (INS) or east -west (EW). Table 4.16-5 Intersection Analysis Locations ID Intersection Location ID Intersection Location 1 Madison Street at Avenue 58 12 Monroe Street at Airport Boulevard 2 Madison Street at Airport Blvd 13 Monroe Street at Avenue 54 3 Madison Street at Avenue 54 14 Monroe Street at Avenue 52 4 Madison Street at Avenue 52 15 Monroe Street at 50th Avenue 5 Madison Street at Avenue 50 16 Monroe Street at 62nd Avenue 6 Jefferson Street at Avenue 54 17 Jackson Street at 60t" Avenue 7 Jefferson Street at Avenue 52 18 Jackson Street at 58t" Avenue 8 Jefferson Street at Avenue 50 19 Jackson Street at Airport Boulevard 9 Monroe Street at Avenue 62 20 Jefferson Street & N. Loop (Future Intersection) 10 Monroe Street at Avenue 60 21 Jefferson Street and S. Loop (Future Intersection) 11 Monroe Street at Avenue 58 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 1-1, Urban Crossroads, November 2020 Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-15 October 2023 645 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-6 Roadway Segment Analysis Locations ID Segment Location ID Segment Location 1 Avenue 58, west of Madison Street 7 Avenue 62, west of Jackson Street 2 Avenue 58, west of Monroe Street 8 Monroe Street, south of Avenue 60 3 Avenue 58, west of Jackson Street 9 Monroe Street, south of Avenue 58 4 Madison Street south of Avenue 56 10 Monroe Street, south of Avenue 56 5 Avenue 60, west of Jackson Street 11 Jackson Street, south of Airport Blvd 6 Avenue 62, west of Monroe Street Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 1-2, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. Unsignalized Intersections The City requires that operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the methodology described in Chapter 19, Chapter 20, and Chapter 32 of the HCM 2010. The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. At two-way or side -street stop - controlled intersections, LOS was calculated for each controlled movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay was computed as the average of all movements in that lane. Table 4.16-7, Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS, identifies seconds of delay associated with differing levels of service. Table 4.16-7 Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS Average Control Description Delay Per Vehicle Level of Service, Level of Service, V/C <_ 1.0 V/C > 1.0 (Seconds) Little or no delays 0 to 10.00 A F Short traffic delays 10.01 to 15.00 B F Average traffic delays 15.01 to 25.00 C F Long traffic delays 25.01 to 35.00 D F Very long traffic delays 35.01 to 50.00 E F Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded > 50.00 F F Required Intersection Level of Service Per City traffic study guidelines, Table 4.16-8, Required Intersection Levels of Service and Table 4.16- 9, Impact Criteria for Intersections Already Operations, show the LOS criteria used in the analysis of the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-16 October 2023 646 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-8 Required Intersection Levels of Service Intersection Type LOS Criteria Signalized Intersection LOS D or Better All -Way Stop Controlled Intersection LOS D or better for all critical movements Cross -Street Stop Controlled Intersection LOS E or better for the side street Table 4.16-9 Impact Criteria for Intersections Already Operating at LOS E or LOS F Significant Changes in LOS LOS E An increase in delay of 2 seconds or more LOS F An increase in delay of 2 seconds or more Impact Analysis Results a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The proposed Project property will consist of approximately 758 single family detached residential homes, 445 duplex residential units, a 100-room resort hotel (Resort/Spa), and Resort/Golf (golf practice, golf academy and banquet accommodations.) The Project property will be served by two access points: 1) the southerly extension of South Jefferson as a Modified Secondary, south of Avenue 58, and 2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary, west of Monroe Street. Secondary/emergency access will be provided by the modified southerly extension of Madison Street as an Emergency Vehicle Access Road. Protect Trip Generation Trip generation was calculated by land use type using the reference Trip Generation, 10th Edition (2017) prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip Generation for the Project was determined by utilizing published rates for the peak hour of the generator rather than for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic, where possible. ITE trip generation rates for Single Family Detached Residential (Code 210,) Multi -family Housing (low-rise) (Code 220,) Hotel (Code 310,) and Golf Course (Code 430) are used. ITE LU Code 430 indicates golf course sites may also have driving ranges and clubhouses with a pro shop, restaurant, lounge, and banquet facilities. This LU code is therefore used to estimate the vehicle trips generated by resort/golf uses in PA 11, resulting in 365 trip ends per day on a typical weekday, with 21 vehicles per hour (VPH) during the weekday AM peak hour, and 34 VPH during the weekday PM peak hour. The mix of PA 11 land uses, with internal interaction, are not anticipated to exceed the weekday peak activity associated with a 12-hole golf course data used in the TIA. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-17 October 2023 647 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Construction Construction activities are not addressed in travel demand models because it is a short-term activity, and the City's significance thresholds do not apply to construction traffic. Construction activity typically occurs outside of commute peak hours and the rigorous analysis of travel activity associated with full occupancy of the Project fully addresses traffic LOS and roadway improvement requirements. At the time of construction permitting, it is anticipated that the construction management team will be required to coordinate with the City of La Quinta and other agencies to obtain the necessary permits. Construction activities result in air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with construction worker, vendor, and haul trips, as well as emissions associated with construction equipment used on -site during site construction activities which include but are not limited to demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, painting, and vertical building construction. These emissions are addressed in the Project air quality and GHG studies. Phase 1 Trip Generation Based on the Project's generation and trip distribution patterns, Project average daily trips (ADT) were identified, as shown in Table 4.16-10. Phase 1(2026) of the Project property is anticipated to generate a net total of 5,836 external trip ends per day with 444 external trips during the AM peak hour and 593 external trips during the PM peak hour. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-18 October 2023 648 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-10 Project Phase 1 (2026) Trip Generation Summary Trip Generation Rates' Land Use Quantity' AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 530 DU 0.19 0.55 0.74 0.62 0.37 0.99 9.44 Multifamily Housing (low-rise) 74 DU 0.11 0.35 0.46 0.35 0.21 0.56 7.32 Resort/Golf3 12 Holes41.39 0.37 1.76 1.54 1.37 2.91 30.38 Trip Generation Results Land Use Quantity' AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 530 DU 101 292 393 329 196 525 5,003 Multifamily Housing (Low-rise) 74 DU 8 26 34 26 16 42 542 Internal to Resort/Golf 0 (2) (2) (2) (2) (4) (37) Residential External Trips 109 316 425 353 210 563 5,508 Resort/Golf 12 Holes4 17 4 21 18 16 34 365 Internal to Residential (2) 0 (2) (2) (2) (4) (37) Resort/Golf External Trips 15 4 19 16 14 30 328 Project Subtotal 126 322 448 373 228 601 5,910 Internal Capture Subtotal (2) (2) (4) (4) (4) (8) (74) Phase 1 (2026) Project Total External Trips 124 320 444 369 224 593 5,836 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Phasing Analysis, Table 4-1, Urban Crossroads, January 2020. Notes: 1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). 2. DU = Dwelling Unit; RM = Room 3. Resort/Golf (golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations). 4. Trip generation associated with a 12-hole golf course is equivalent to the proposed golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations. Phase 2 Trip Generation As shown in Table 4.16-11, Phase 2 (2029) of the Project property is anticipated to generate a net total of 8,343 external trip ends per day with 620 external trips during the AM peak hour and 823 external trips during the PM peak hour. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-19 October 2023 649 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-11 Project Phase 2 (2029) Trip Generation Summary Trip Generation Rates' Land Use Quantity' AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 673 DU 0.19 0.55 0.74 0.62 0.37 0.99 9.44 Multifamily Housing (low-rise) 237 DU 0.11 0.35 0.46 0.35 0.21 0.56 7.32 Resort/Golf' 12 Holes4 1.39 0.37 1.76 1.54 1.37 2.91 30.38 Trip Generation Results Land Use Quantity' AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 673 DU 128 370 498 417 249 666 6,353 Multifamily Housing (Low-rise) 237 DU 26 83 109 83 50 133 1,735 Internal to Resort/Golf (1) (3) (4) (2) (3) (5) (55) Residential External Trips E777 153 450 603 498 296 794 8,033 Resort/Golf3 12 Holes4 17 4 21 18 16 34 365 Internal to Residential (3) (1) (4) (3) (2) (4) (55) Resort/Golf External Trips 14 3 17 15 14 29 310 Project Subtotal 171 457 628 518 315 833 8,453 Internal Capture Subtotal (4) (4) (8) (5) (5) (10) (110) Phase 2 (2029) Project Total External Trips 167 453 620 513 310 823 8,343 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Phasing Analysis, Table 4-1, Urban Crossroads, January 2020. Notes: 1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). 2. DU = Dwelling Unit; RM = Room 3. Resort/Golf (golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations). 4. Trip generation associated with a 12-hole golf course is equivalent to the proposed golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations. Phase 3 Buildout Trip Generation As shown in Table 4.16-12, Phase 3 (2031) of the Project property is anticipated to generate a net total of 11,321 external trip ends per day with 812 external trips during the AM peak hour and 1,057 external trips during the PM peak hour. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-20 October 2023 650 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-12 Project Phase 3 Buildout (2031) Trip Generation Summary Trip Generation Rates' Land Use QuantityZ AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 758 DU 0.19 0.55 0.74 0.62 0.37 0.99 9.44 Multifamily Housing (low-rise) 442 DU 0.11 0.35 0.46 0.35 0.21 0.56 7.32 Hotel (Resort/Spa) 100 RM 0.36 0.26 0.62 0.36 0.37 0.73 12.38 Resort/Golf' 12 Holes4 1.39 0.37 1.76 1.54 1.37 1 2.91 30.38 Trip Generation Results Land Use QuantityZ AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached 758 DU 144 417 561 470 280 750 7,156 Multifamily Housing (Low-rise) 442 DU 49 155 204 155 93 248 3,235 Internal to Hotel & Resort/Golf (6) (12) (18) (12) (12) (24) (256) Residential External Trips 187 560 747 613 361 974 10,135 Hotel (Resort/Spa) 100 RM 36 26 62 36 37 73 1,223 Internal to Residential & Resort/Golf (5) (4) (9) (5) (6) (11) (256) Residential External Trips 31 22 53 31 31 62 967 Resort/Golf' 12 Holes4 17 4 21 18 16 34 365 Internal to Residential& Hotel (7) (2) (9) (5) (6) (11) (256) Resort/Golf External Trips 10 2 12 11 10 21 219 Project Subtotal 246 602 848 679 426 1,105 11,979 Internal Capture Subtotal (18) (18) (36) (24) (24) (48) (658) Phase 3 (2031) Project Total External Trips 228 584 812 655 402 1,057 11,321 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Phasing Analysis, Table 5-1, Urban Crossroads, January 2020. Notes: 1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). 2. DU = Dwelling Unit; RM = Room 3. Resort/Golf (golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations). 4. Trip generation associated with a 12-hole golf course is equivalent to the proposed golf practice, golf academy, and banquet accommodations. Future Traffic Conditions With Project Buildout (2031) Future traffic conditions were evaluated, to include existing traffic, ambient growth, and other developments in the area (referred to as "2031 cumulative traffic"). Future "with Project" conditions analyzed Project traffic plus existing ambient growth plus cumulative traffic conditions. Both ambient growth and cumulative traffic are utilized to generate a conservative analysis. TIA Development Scenarios and Analysis Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-21 October 2023 651 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Existing Plus Project (E+P) Conditions Traffic Analysis Under this scenario the TIA evaluated impacts on intersection and roadway segments for Existing conditions plus Project trips (E+P). E+P Intersection Operations Analysis The results of the analysis for E+P conditions are shown in Table 4.16-13, Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Project Conditions. For the purposes of this analysis, the E+P analysis scenario was utilized to determine potentially significant Project impacts associated solely with the development of the proposed Project and the corresponding mitigation measures necessary to mitigate these impacts. As shown in Table 4.16-13, the 21 intersections (19 existing + 2 Project intersections) study area intersections are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS with the addition of Project traffic for E+P conditions. Of the 19 existing study area intersections, 18 are anticipated to continue to operate at acceptable LOS (D) or better with the addition of Project traffic to 2019 traffic conditions. Under this scenario, the study area intersection of Monroe Street at Avenue 52 (#14) will require installation of a traffic signal, in order to maintain acceptable LOS under E+P conditions. Existing Plus Project (E+P) Conditions This table includes "Bolded" text. If Delay and/or LOS is Bold, this indicates an unacceptable condition with an existing traffic control mechanism. If Traffic Control is bold, RDB indicates a proposed Project roundabout improvement and TS indicates a proposed traffic signal improvement in compliance with the General Plan. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. Table 4.16-13 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Project (E+P) Conditions (Assumes Project Buildout) ID# Intersection Traffic Control' Delay (in seconds)' Level of Service' AM PM AM PM 1 Madison St. / Avenue 58 - Without Improvements AWS 11.0 13.9 B B 2 Madison St. / Airport Blvd. TS 8.3 6.7 A A 3 Madison St. / Avenue 54 - Without Improvements AWS 16.3 27.9 C D 4 Madison St. / Avenue 52 TS 29.9 30.7 C C 5 Madison St. / Avenue 50 TS 29.5 30.0 C C 6 Jefferson St. / Avenue 54 - Without Improvements AWS 17.1 21.6 C C 7 Jefferson St. / Avenue 52 - Without Improvements RDB 11.3 12.5 B B Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-22 October 2023 652 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 8 Jefferson St. / Avenue 50 - Without Improvements TS 47.7 49.2 D D 9 Monroe St. / Avenue 62 - Without Improvements AWS 9.6 12.1 A B 10 Monroe St. / Avenue 60 - Without Improvements AWS 10.2 11.1 B B 11 Monroe St. / Avenue 58 - Without Improvements AWS 9.9 17.4 A C 12 Monroe St. / Airport Blvd. - Without Improvements AWS 10.3 11.9 B B 13 Monroe St. / Avenue 54 - Without Improvements AWS 17.8 18.0 C C Monroe St. / Avenue 52 14 - Without Improvements AWS 22.8 50.4 C F - With CIP Improvements TS 34.2 30.3 C C 15 Monroe St. / 50th Avenue TS 16.2 17.4 B B 16 Jackson St. / 62nd Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 8.3 8.6 A A 17 Jackson St. / 60th Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 7.6 8.2 A A 18 Jackson St. / 58th Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 8.0 9.2 A A 19 Jackson St. / Airport Blvd. - Without Improvements AWS 8.6 9.7 A A 20 Jefferson St. / N. Loop RDB 4.0 4.7 A A 21 Jefferson St. / S. Loop RDB 4.1 4.8 A A Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 3-1, Urban Crossroads, November 2020 Notes: RDB = Improvement; TS= improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012) Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 analysis software. Bold = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS) TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -street Stop; AWS = All -Way Stop; RDB = Roundabout E+P Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis The roadway segment capacities are approximate and are typically used at the General Plan level to assist in determining the roadway functional classification (number of through lanes) needed to meet future forecasted traffic demand. Table 4.16-14, Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-23 October 2023 653 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Plus Project Conditions, provides a summary of the E+P traffic conditions roadway segment capacity analysis based on the City roadway segment capacity thresholds. As shown on Table 4.16-14, all study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for E+P traffic conditions with existing lane configurations. Table 4.16-14 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing Plus Project (E+P) Conditions Roadway Segment Roadway Designation Through Travel Lanes Capacity' ADT3 Capacity Ratio West of Madison St. Secondary 3 21,0004 7,300 0.35 2 14,0006 7,300 0.52 Ave 58 West of Monroe St. Secondary 4 28,000 4,000 0.14 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 3,000 0.21 Madison St. South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 10,100 0.24 60th Ave West of Jackson St. Primary 2 19,0005 1,800 0.09 Ave 62 West of Monroe St. Modified Secondary 2 19,000 6,300 0.33 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 4,000 0.29 South of Ave 60 Secondary 2 14,0004 5,000 0.36 Monroe St. South of Ave 58 Primary 2 19,0005 5,500 0.29 South of Ave 56 Primary 3 31,9506 6,800 0.21 Jackson St. South of Airport BI Primary 2 19,0005 3,500 0.18 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 3-2, Urban Crossroads, November 2020 Notes: 1. Existing Number of Through lanes. 2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (July 2015). 3. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day. 4. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Secondary capacity. 5. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Primary capacity. 6. Estimated capacity for 2-lane Primary. Traffic Signal Warrants The traffic signal warrant analysis further found that under E+P traffic conditions, two additional intersections are projected to satisfy traffic signal warrants: • Madison Street at Avenue 58 • Monroe Street at Avenue 62 Phase 3 Buildout Trip Generation Project Phase 3, which constitutes Project buildout, includes Existing (2019) volumes, Ambient Growth traffic for 12 years, cumulative development traffic, and Project traffic. The results of the Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-24 October 2023 654 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Project Buildout HCM intersection analysis and roadway segment capacity analysis are also presented. At buildout, the Project will provide two public access routes: 1) the southerly extension of South Jefferson as an interim section (40-foot pavement section, sidewalk on west side) south of Avenue 58, and 2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as an interim section (40-foot pavement section, sidewalk on west side), west of Monroe Street (consistent with Phase 1 conditions). As shown on Table 4.16-12, Project buildout will generate a net total of approximately 11,321 external trip -ends per day on a typical weekday with 812 vehicles per hour (VPH) during the weekday AM peak hour and 1,057 external VPH during the weekday PM peak hour. Buildout Trip Distribution The trip distribution pattern at Project buildout is onto two public routes for access: 1) the southerly extension of South Jefferson as an interim section (40-foot pavement section, sidewalk on the west side,) south of Avenue 58, and 2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as an interim section (40-foot pavement section, sidewalk on the west side), west of Monroe Street for access (consistent with Phase 1 conditions). Both Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street will be built to their ultimate conditions within the Project property limits. Like Phase 1 and 2 conditions, approximately 70% of Project traffic travels north of Avenue S8. Table 4.16-15 includes "Bolded" text. If Delay and/or LOS is Bold, this indicates an unacceptable condition with an existing traffic control mechanism. If Traffic Control is bold, RDB indicates a proposed Project roundabout improvement and TS indicates a proposed traffic signal improvement in compliance with the General Plan Circulation Element. Bolded traffic control measures are required to reach acceptable LOS. Notes below the table define the associated acronyms. The Project will be required to participate in the DIF program. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-25 October 2023 655 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-15 Intersection Analysis for Project Buildout (2031) Conditions (with 2031 Cumulative Traffic) # Intersection Traffic Control' Without Project With Project Delay (in seconds)' Level of Service Delay (in seconds)' Level of Service AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1 Madison St. / Avenue 58 -Without Improvements AWS 28.2 >80 D F 72.4 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 27.8 38.5 C D 34.8 43.9 C D 2 Madison St. / Airport Blvd. TS 11.0 10.5 B B 11.1 10.5 B B 3 Madison St. / Avenue 54 -Without Improvements AWS >80 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 37.3 38.7 D D 38.9 39.8 D D 4 Madison St. / Avenue 52 TS 33.9 36.0 C D 34.7 37.4 C D 5 Madison St. / Avenue 50 TS 34.1 36.5 C D 34.5 36.8 C D 6 Jefferson St. / Avenue 54 -Without Improvements AWS >80 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 36.9 34.5 D C 37.6 41.4 D D 7 Jefferson St. / Avenue 52 -Without Improvements RDB >80 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements RDB 3.7 4.7 A A 3.7 5.2 A A 8 Jefferson St. / Avenue 50 -Without Improvements TS 56.3 75.2 E E 56.9 76.2 E E -With Improvements TS 52.9 50.5 D D 53.2 51.8 D D 9 Monroe St. / Avenue 62 -Without Improvements AWS 9.7 16.6 A C 13.3 53.5 B F -With Improvements TS - - - - 39.2 42.4 D D 10 Monroe St. / Avenue 60 -Without Improvements AWS 36.7 >80 E F 70.8 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 13.5 14.9 B B 13.8 18.3 B B 11 Monroe St. / Avenue 58 -Without Improvements AWS 55.9 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 29.0 38.7 C D 29.4 54.6 C D 12 Monroe St. / Airport Blvd. -Without Improvements AWS 59.9 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 11.7 15.1 B B 12.5 22.7 B C 13 Monroe St. / Avenue 54 -Without Improvements AWS >80 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 29.5 33.8 C C 29.3 34.5 C C 14 Monroe St. / Avenue 52 Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-26 October 2023 656 4.16 TRANSPORTATION - Without Improvements AWS >80 >80 F F >80 >80 F F -With Improvements TS 39.6 43.7 D D 40.1 45.7 D D 15 Monroe St. / 50th Avenue TS 22.1 49.2 C D 23.3 54.9 C D 16 Jackson St. / 62nd Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 10.9 17.8 B C 13.9 46.8 B E - With Improvements TS - - - - 26.0 27.7 C C 17 Jackson St. / 60th Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 11.3 37.1 B E 12.4 72.7 B F - With Improvements TS 29.1 26.7 C 15.3 27.3 B C 18 Jackson St. / 58th Avenue - Without Improvements AWS 13.7 >80 B F 17.3 >80 C F - With Improvements TS 12.3 26.7 B C 12.7 29.4 B C 19 Jackson St. / Airport Blvd. -Without Improvements AWS 14.9 >80 B F 19.3 >80 C F -With Improvements TS 23.2 14.0 C B 23.7 27.3 C C 20 Jefferson St. / N. Loop RDB Intersection does not exist 4.0 4.7 A A 21 Jefferson St. / S. Loop I RDB I Intersection does not exist 4.1 4.8 A A Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Phasing Analysis, Table 3-2, Urban Crossroads, January 2020. Notes: 1. RDB = Improvement; TS= improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012) 2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 analysis software. Bold = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e. unacceptable LOS) 3. TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -street Stop; AWS = All -Way Stop; RDB = Roundabout Table 4.16-16 provides a summary of Project Buildout (2031) roadway segment traffic conditions. As shown on Table 4.16-16, all study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS under Project Buildout (2031) traffic conditions with existing lane configurations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-27 October 2023 657 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-16 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative Plus Proiect Buildout (2031) Conditions (with 2031 Cumulative Traffic) Roadway Segment Roadwy Designation Through Travel Lanes CapacityZ ADT3 Capacity Ratio West of Madison St. Secondary 3 21,0004 11,600 0.55 2 14,0006 11,600 0.83 Ave 58 West of Monroe St. Secondary 4 28,000 9,800 0.35 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 8,900 0.64 Madison St. South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 23,900 0.56 60th Ave West of Jackson St. Primary 2 19,000, 6,700 0.35 Ave 62 West of Monroe St. Modified Secondary 2 19,000 7,500 0.39 West of Jackson St. Secondary 2 14,0004 9,000 0.64 South of Ave 60 Secondary 2 14,0004 11,600 0.83 Monroe St. South of Ave 58 Primary 2 19,000, 14,900 0.78 South of Ave 56 Primary 3 31,9506 15,900 0.50 Jackson St. South of Airport BI Primary 2 19,0005 11,500 0.61 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 6-3, Urban Crossroads, November 2020 Notes: 1. Existing Number of Through lanes. 2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (July 2015). 3. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day. 4. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Secondary capacity. 5. Capacity was calculated as a ratio of 4-lane Primary capacity. 6. Estimated capacity for 2-lane Primary. Project Buildout Operations Analysis LOS calculations were conducted for the study intersections to evaluate their operations under Project Buildout (2031) Without and With Project traffic conditions. The results of the analysis for Project Buildout conditions are shown in Table 4.16-19, Intersection Analysis for Phase 3 (2031) Conditions, which indicates that the following two study area intersections experience Project impacts requiring CIP-funded improvements in order to maintain acceptable LOS under Project Buildout With Project Conditions: • Monroe Street at Avenue 62 • Jackson Street at Avenue 62 Needed intersection improvements include traffic signals to be constructed by the Project for eventual reimbursement via the City of La Quinta or County of Riverside (Jackson Street/Avenue 62 is entirely in the County of Riverside). Exhibit 4.16-2 shows the recommended Project Buildout Circulation Plan and Exhibit 4.16-3 shows Project onsite design standards and contributions to off -site improvements. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-28 October 2023 658 - . ,STREET '+ LOOP S TREE T t EAST LOOP STREET AEST I y I 1r i SECT;CAN 5 ACCESS } f 1 A VENUE 62 FFF"' •{ ' J' r— k..t_ — ;s. '. lY .,:{+5;.4 _ .:., �- } k y,� ., t �'_ . � — _ —r —.I � f 4 +: �4} 'r +l, � � � _•� _. 7 -y I 5 f .. ti �•., k f �v r deffermh Street r Avenue fit [ YI Roundabout Erp. g".cy Vehicular A ess L6GP E65BCi4d Gates -. Local Roads Access Road Source: TRG Land, Inc. PHASE 3 (2031) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN A ]OULTING INC. }Uir.Iir' ivl. ?!Jr:•r�� FLJ��i'4tiCy�r.l9�;Ir�;, TRAVEfNE EXHIBIT 6-2 PRO.ECr IWER'S€e~T M FAIR` S+0AE % -Avfr♦ur. .1%vF,NA-0 YA PROJECT IN1E11-fCT110 FNR SHARE % .A'tENLrzM ss� PRjO. ECT FAIR OLIARE,144 N !'JMO.>FCT IRTEMECTION FAIR SIME % =Nt = FA C JfEL1E Sa �di I FAlik�#i;1026 L Vk Vk I PROJECT FAIR PJ 43RE • 8?i+ PkvJ�Cr MUSEC110A Fb1R S-ItRE'� KFORT 4L116r S% M AV. aFvLn: E% PRQJECTFAIR$H1RE; H� aL�no AV- J TI4hd10 PMEv: �,r 4 i0WrPhk RA WME Y 4ONaTICN& TPArT-J,-SI IM*&n1F-W7P — Furuu nwric sivgAL W7M§EWfl SEPARAT: %RN lAKES1FO14 THE 3 � * * =PRWECI R{�JNDABM = EVISTF610 IARE INMW107I�HB&MX S1M'eAT6WNUIT ptAND..00KS(� %iVINEM AT52wd.auT S�;R:D 9E:.#]1�.:T#dx"s�C:1 AWFiK - PRGJFrT ACrF55I.Q qF IMPPQVFMF-N7 RgMBURSEVE TTVV<THE vrraFLA C"WAL1;1?9, -UJIVULArIVE'01ra PROJE{7IMPROVEMENT -M£{'I-IED5cCON"VARTERIAL t'fWJF�TFlk>$r{BAi: • AT 1AMPLOE 5-REETWIEULEE E2 y = KC01, EE SECONDARY ARTERIAL 9leALT %Cr3&jSTREE?rE-ra0A4E# € [IwuliM C'�055-<CTIORi — �DLLEC OR - BffI�1+:f -- — — = E14E,zroENGV WHICULAR ACCESS (EVC I YpAvERrvtE �u4a PjL,"nq,A zoz.rAs',E:�-o Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc. PHASE 3 (2031) RECOMMENDED ACCESS FEATURES �-�� CONTRIBUTIONS TO OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENTS o- :• .•.i �r:�N�- } T ivl. ?!Jr;.i r��; Fi:J�Q ��4�ti L y1I.19�E: ' TRAVERTINE EXH1B1-K.16- 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Project Buildout Site Access Improvements Public access at Project buildout will be accommodated by the aggregate of prescribed on -and off - site improvements for Phases 1 through 3. These include the above -described improvements along Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street to Avenue 58. The Madison Street EVA will also remain in place but will be limited to providing emergency access only. With implementation of TRA-1, the Project will be consistent with General Plan policies related to LOS. Intersections found in other jurisdictions, such as the County of Riverside and the City of Indio will be updated in accordance with their relative General Plan policies. Both Jurisdictions utilize LOS D as an acceptable level of service. Project Site Internal Circulation Project Intersection Controls and Street Cross -Sections Two main access points of public access are South Jefferson Street and Avenue 62. Madison Street will provide long-term emergency access to the property. The internal road (Loop) would intersect with Jefferson Street at two roundabout -controlled intersections (Jefferson Street at North Loop and Jefferson Street at South Loop). Jefferson street through the Project property and the Loop Road are depicted in Exhibit 3-14, Circulation Plan, in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. Five additional Project gated access points along Jefferson Street are proposed as cross -street stop - controlled intersections with median breaks to allow left turns. All five full access intersections meet Jefferson Street as three-legged intersections, with turning volume of less than 50 vehicles per hour in the peak hour. The opposing volume in each instance is less than 500 vehicles per hour in the peak hour, and the left turn bays/lanes needed are less than the minimum (100 feet with 90-foot transition). Exhibit 4.16-4, Recommended On -Site Road Improvements, shows the recommended roadway lane improvements for the main roads through the property. Internal lane improvements are shown on Exhibit 4.16-5, On -Site Recommended Lane Improvements. The following is a summary of the road improvements proposed as part of the Project. Jefferson Street — The applicant will construct Jefferson Street from the Project boundary to Avenue 58 as an interim section with 1 lane northbound, 1 lane southbound with bike lanes on both sides of the street, and a sidewalk adjacent to the west side of the street. Within the Project property, Jefferson Street will be constructed at its ultimate full section width, with curb and gutters. Outside of the Project property, future General Plan lanes would occur without or with the Project (by others). Improvements are part of Phase 1 and will be completed prior to Project occupancy. Avenue 62 — The applicant will construct Avenue 62 from the Project property to Monroe Street as an interim section with 1 lane eastbound, 1 lane westbound, bike lanes, and a sidewalk adjacent to the north side of the street due to existing limitations of levee construction and offsite ROW availability from adjacent ownership. Within the Project property, Avenue 62 will be constructed at Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-31 October 2023 661 4.16 TRANSPORTATION its ultimate full section width as shown on Exhibit 4.16-4, with curb and gutters. Improvements are part of Phase 1 and will be completed prior to Project occupancy. Loop — The North and South Loop roads will operate as a circular roadway between the North and South Loop intersections with Jefferson Street. The applicant will construct Loop Road at its ultimate full section width as a Collector (70-foot right-of-way with a 40-foot paved section), with curb and gutters with bike lanes and sidewalks. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-32 October 2023 662 MODIFIED SECONDARY (JEFERSON ST;tF ETIAVENUE 62) COLLECTOR IY x P AV CM EX042-T 73' 12' � jr I+ Pw "Elf � 15C PIE III 'II. �Od ITE r� - � �-r 1x�x 1s-r r'�• LOCAL, PARKING ON BATH SIDES LOCAL, PARKING ON ONE SiD ar' xc« tM aF eta' eo' IT i' ed us 50ISlLLk onTIML UW 9WOU LuEN £ E 9 IME LME JEFFERSON STREET GUADALUPE BRIDGE ANU AVENUE 62 BRIDGE T-,EL LYE Trar•EL DhE LINE L44E LAKE so' ix �xa Sf. w]-uwL GWVE INTERIM OFF -SITE JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 62 ACCESS CONNECTIONS Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc. h CONSULTING IN(,. RECOMMENDED ON -SITE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ivl.=!Jr;.lIds;FW4Qj-5:4AtiLN1.lLJ'WVIII"—i TRAVE�J�NE EXHIBIT 6-4 1p CINS?kIPCFA7ERSON iVIEWr?ATE NUE 49 WEMw � } - Mass-SEunimH '=4WT mf=kIE1aT ssi lD+I. SIDEWALK ON W--M 51PQ F GM THE v0QKCT ,. NDRTHq*3TEF�XB 4RY TO AYEl4_�e 5A ` �$ •�k , - M1 V : z !IiiI 55 N, I �J CUMYTRUC7 .frIFIFkSUN 'kitN.EALVCKA f2 AT ITS rjLT 1%w fU-14gT" WPTH AS A RM IArlEa SEC13YDARY RQZDML'f (a#f0PT CURB-TXRl� WVnLq SYITF4N TIM ETIQ;LGT 3TTE i LEGEND; —ROUfGfi&]liT C -UTE r — — — — — — — — — � =POMM .5`L Y A;ATERIJ41. -C CI UJ CTOR =LCKA _ -01RA 1 t•, . CWIF:YtitLl J,I.I.r ilL'h VENYFJ&VD .E - 21NTFf#M I IR9G5-5EVE WNC404C T I VAA`4 LN1 9EV21M-91V-WALK ON :IURTE.'9D£y FK-PM THE P2PRITS )AQWGF�TRFf - I •- I -Wmm1W -MIh1INIUINIFT0 1 RQI;IiFT I$eCTn VWAr-r-KY 1THk;U'MP ff.�i95'E'� ; Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc. _ =EJ'FE EFOIEWHRY' JLMIrE H T MSS CONSULTING INC RECOMMENDED ON -SITE LANE IMPROVEMENTS o-;!LAIPR N }T iwl. ,=!Jr;.II� a�a� 4ltitiCy�I.l9 oi'II{,�, TRAVER �NE EXHIBIT6 6-5 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Transit Service The City of La Quinta is currently served by the SunLine Transit Agency, but there is no bus service currently serving the Project property study area. Transit service is reviewed and updated by the SunLine Transit Agency periodically to address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate. Therefore, because SunLine does not currently serve the Project property study area, there will be no impacts to SunLine services or facilities and the Project will not otherwise interfere with implementation of SunLine transit network. Non -motorized Transportation Facilities These facilities include sidewalks, multipurpose trails, bicycle lanes and golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) lanes. The proposed Project property includes pedestrian and bicycle facilities distributed throughout the proposed development. Sidewalks and two Class II bike lanes will be provided along Jefferson Street and Loop throughout the Project property. Off -site, the interim section of Jefferson Street from the Project property boundary to Avenue 58 includes bike lanes on both sides of the roadway and a sidewalk on the westside of the roadway. The offsite section of Avenue 62 from the Project property boundary to Monroe Street includes a bike lane and sidewalk on the north side only. The City does not have jurisdiction over the south half of this street. The Travertine Specific Plan includes routes for golf carts and NEVs (also referred to as Low -Speed Electric Vehicles or LSEVs), as well as recharging facilities at the resort/spa, golf clubhouse and community clubhouse. The Specific Plan provides an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of paths to allow safe and convenient access to recreational and community centers. The proposed internal Class II bike lanes will be developed along Jefferson Street, connecting to Avenue 62. These lanes will be 8-feet wide to accommodate both bikes and golf carts. Implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan would be consistent with the City's General Plan 2035 goals and policies for non -motorized transportation, specifically Policy CIR 1.12 to reduce vehicular traffic and vehicles miles traveled by developing a land use pattern that maximizes interactions between adjacent or nearby land uses; and Program CIR-1.12.c, where new development shall provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent streets and assure that infrastructure and amenities accommodate pedestrian and bicycle use. The Specific Plan Circulation Plan includes a network of sidewalks, bike lanes and trails through and around the Project property, as well as along the extension of Jefferson Street between the Project property and Avenue 58, and along Avenue 62 east of the Project site. In addition, the bike lanes will be striped as 8-foot-wide lanes to accommodate golf carts and NEVs. Hiking trails are also included in the proposed Project that will generally run outside the developed portion of the Project property. A multi -use trail will bisect the Loop and connect east to the hiking Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-35 October 2023 665 4.16 TRANSPORTATION trail, as well, with grade separation at Jefferson Street (i.e., the trail goes under the roadway). Two trail heads are proposed as part of the Project to provide access to the onsite hiking, biking and multi- use trails. Exhibit 8-3 of the TIA illustrates the proposed Pedestrian and Bicycle Routes. In summary, the proposed Project provides a robust network of bike paths, pedestrian ways, and other multi -modal facilities. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1 and TRA- 2, the Project will not conflict with any City program, plan, ordinance, or policy regarding multi -modal transportation. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant because the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan 2035 Circulation Plan regarding non -motorized transportation. b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Vehicle Miles Travelled The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) procedures for determination of transportation impacts have recently changed to add an evaluation of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) rather than an emphasis on vehicle delay or LOS, due to Senate Bill 743 (SB 743). VMT Methodology The Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Policy (June 2020) (City Guidelines) is consistent with the VMT analysis methodology recommended in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3. As outlined in the La Quinta Guidelines, a Mixed -Use project such as Travertine, which includes both residential and non- residential uses, has each type of use analyzed independently, applying the following significance thresholds for each land use component: • For Residential Uses, VMT per resident exceeding a level of (1) 15 percent below the Citywide per resident VMT OR (2) 15 percent below regional VMT per resident, whichever is more stringent. • For Retail Uses (Includes Hotels), a net increase in the total existing VMT for the region. The La Quinta Guidelines identify the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM) as the appropriate tool for conducting VMT analysis for land use projects. RIVTAM considers interaction between different land uses based on socio-economic data such as population, households, and employment. Project VMT was calculated using the most current version of RIVTAM. Adjustments in socioeconomic data (SED) (i.e., employment) were made to a separate Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) within the RIVTAM model to reflect the Project's proposed population and employment uses. Separate TAZs are used to isolate the Project's VMT. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-36 October 2023 ... 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Construction CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b)(3) provides that if existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicles miles traveled, a lead agency may analyze the Project's vehicle miles traveled qualitatively. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b)(3) further provides that a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate. Vehicle trips used for construction purposes would be temporary, and any generated VMT would generally be minor and limited to construction equipment and personnel and would not result in long-term trip generation. Table 4.16-17 summarizes the service population estimates (population, hotel guests and employment) for the Project. It should be noted that the employment estimates have been developed from land use to employment generation factors from the Riverside County General Plan but modified for the specific Project characteristics and then confirmed with the Client. Although the Project employment is a mix of employment types, the City of La Quinta guidelines are explicit indicating that the hotel land uses are categorized as retail uses for the purposes of VMT analysis. Table 4.16-17 Service Population and Emplovment Estimates Land Use Estimated Service Population Residential 3,250 Residents 100-Room Hotel/Resort 170 Employees 100-Room Hotel/Resort Villas 200 Occupants PA 11 Resort/Golf • Golf Practice (4-Holes) & Driving Range • Golf Academy • Banquet Facility & Restaurant 15 Employees 30 Employees 35 Employees Total Service Population: 3,700 Service Population Adjustments to population and employment factors for the Project TAZ were made to the RIVTAM base year model (2012) and the cumulative year model (2040). Each model was then run with the updated SED factors included for the Project TAZ. Project Residential VMT Calculation The residential calculation of VMT is based upon the home -based Project generated VMT per population. This calculation focuses on the occupants of dwelling units within the Project, whereas hotel occupants and employees are evaluated separately using the boundary method discussed below. Table 4.16-18 shows the home -based VMT associated with the Project for both baseline and cumulative conditions. VMT estimates are provided for both the base year model (2012) and cumulative year model (2040), and linear interpolation was used to determine the Project's home - based baseline (2020) VMT. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-37 October 2023 667 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-18 Baseline and Cumulative Proiect Residential Home -Based VMT Project 2012 Project 2040 Project 2020 (interpolated) Residents 31250 3,250 3,250 VMT 47,140 51,926 48,508 VMT/Resident 14.50 15.98 14.93 For baseline (2020) conditions, the residential portion of the Project generates 48,508 Home -Based VMT. Upon buildout, there will be approximately 3,250 Project residents. The result is approximately 14.93 home -based VMT /Capita for the 2020 Baseline with Project conditions. Citywide home -based VMT estimates have been also developed from the RIVTAM model run for baseline conditions. Once total home -based VMT for the area is calculated, total area VMT is then normalized by dividing by the population as shown on Table 4.16-19. Table 4.16-19 Citywide Home -Based VMT Category City of La Quinta VMT 544,993 Population 42,000 VMT/Resident 12.98 The estimates of baseline residential home -based Project VMT / Capita are compared to the City of La Quinta VMT of 12.98 home -based VMT / Capita. The City of La Quinta guidelines indicate that residential VMT exceeding 15 percent below the Citywide VMT per resident (11.03 VMT / capita) represents a Project impact. The Project's unmitigated home -based VMT / Capita of 14.93 is greater than the City VMT / Capita threshold, and a potentially significant VMT impact is indicated. Project Design Features for VMT Reduction Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies have been evaluated for the purpose of reducing VMT impacts determined to be potentially significant. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, (CAPCOA) 2010 provides guidance for evaluating the potential reduction in VMT expected for individual measures. CAPCOA indicates that ten percent is the maximum reduction when combining multiple mitigation strategies for the suburban place type as the Project setting most closely reflects (characterized by dispersed, low -density, single -use, automobile dependent land use patterns) and requires a project to contain a diverse land use mix, workforce housing, and project - specific transit. The maximum reduction expected when combining multiple mitigation strategies for the suburban place type is 10 percent and requires a project to contain a diverse land use mix, workforce housing, and project -specific transit, according to CAPCOA. As discussed below, the Project is not eligible for the maximum 10% reduction, however it is eligible for a smaller reduction. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-38 October 2023 4.16 TRANSPORTATION The Project incorporates design features and attributes promoting trip reduction (discussed subsequently). Because these features/attributes are integral to the Project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they are not considered to be mitigation measures. However, the RIVTAM does not incorporate modeling of these features, so they are considered after the VMT data is extracted from the traffic model. Project vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are reduced by the following project design features/attributes, which are anticipated to collectively reduce Project home -based VMT by approximately 3%: • Having different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport. For example, when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as resort land uses, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her recreational needs. The Project will implement marketing strategies to optimize interaction between on -site resort and residential uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip reduction strategies. Marketing strategies will include: ■ Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities ■ Event promotions ■ Publications • The Project's mix of resort and residential uses could provide for a potential reduction in Project residential VMT of 2%. • The Project includes sidewalk connections and would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The Project's implementation of this measure could provide for a potential reduction in Project residential VMT of 1%. The above Project design features are enumerated in PDF ENR-1 and PDF ENR-2 in Section 3.5 (Project Description). The VMT reduction achieved by the implementation of project design features/attributes is anticipated to be approximately 3%. This would result in a Project Residential VMT of 12.59 which is more than the City's VMT residential threshold of 11.03 VMT per resident and a VMT impact. Due to the Project property's location and lack of access to public transit, additional CAPCOA Transportation Strategies considered but not applicable to the Project for VMT reductions include: • Land Use/ Location: Location Efficiency, Transit Accessibility, Orientation Toward Non -Auto Corridor. • Neighborhood/Site Enhancement: Urban Non -Motorized Zones. • Transit System Improvements: Network Expansion, Service Frequency/Speed, Bus Rapid Transit, Access Improvements. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-39 October 2023 .•• 4.16 TRANSPORTATION • Commute Trip Reduction: Transit Fare Subsidy, Workplace Parking Pricing, End of Trip Facilities In summary, travel demand modeling of VMT for the Project based upon City of La Quinta guidelines indicates a potential to generate excessive VMTs especially from on -site residential uses. Project design features taken into account after the modeling process reduce home -based VMT from 14.93 VMT / resident. However, the estimated 12.59 home -based VMT per resident is more than the City's VMT residential threshold and a VMT impact. Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 are recommended to reduce residential and non-residential VMT. However, even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation, impacts are significant and unavoidable for residential VMT. Project Employment Impact on VMT Travel activity associated with total link -level VMT was extracted from the "without Project" and "with non-residential Project" RIVTAM model runs for 2012 and 2040 conditions, then interpolated for baseline (2020) conditions. This "boundary method" includes the total VMT for all vehicle trips with one or both trip ends within a specific geographic area. The "boundary method" VMT per service population for the CVAG subregion is utilized to normalize VMT into a standard unit for comparison purposes, focusing on the total population and employment in the Coachella Valley. Once total VMT for the area is calculated, total area VMT is then normalized by dividing by the respective service population (i.e., population and employment of the Coachella Valley) as shown on Table 4.16-20. Table 4.16-20 Base Year Sub -Regional Link -Level VMT Without Project Employment With Project Employment VMT Interacting with CVAG Area 15,173,739 15,172,507 CVAG Area Population 510,550 510,550 CVAG Area Employment 193,090 193,340 VMT / Service Population 21.56 21.56 To determine whether there is a significant impact using the boundary method, CVAG area VMT with the Project employment is compared to without Project conditions. The CVAG subregion VMT / SP without Project employment and with Project employment are both estimated at 21.56. However, the total VMT slightly decreases from 15,173,739 to 15,172,507 with the addition of the Project. When a Project includes a mix of uses that provides additional opportunities for nearby (and Project) residents to work, recreate, etc., the non-residential VMT for an area can decrease. Additional new jobs in an area work to reduce the regional VMT. The Project's effect on VMT (for non-residential uses) is not considered significant. Therefore, impacts associated with VMT can be considered less than significant for non-residential uses but significant for residential uses. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-40 October 2023 670 4.16 TRANSPORTATION C. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses As shown in Exhibit 3-14 in Chapter 3.0 Project Description, the proposed Project will be developed as a private ungated community (with potential gates at individual residential areas). The two major streets through the site will be Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 and a Loop Street. These main streets will be fed by local streets developed within individual planning areas. The Project's circulation system will be designed for motor vehicles as well as cyclists and golf carts/NEVs and will comply with the City of La Quinta standards for road development. Project design will include adequate stacking distances and lines of sight at gated entries to residential communities. Proposed landscape and signage design will be reviewed to ensure that lines of sight are not impeded. All onsite design will require review and approval by the City of La Quinta and County of Riverside Fire Department. Temporary impacts may occur during the construction of infrastructure improvements serving the Project, including offsite roadway and infrastructure, include five CVWD wells and an IID substation. Construction of these infrastructure improvements would cause short-term impacts related to noise, dust, and traffic flows as a result of temporary lane closures, if required. To minimize potential temporary traffic flow impacts during construction, a detailed construction traffic management plan(s) shall be prepared and submitted to the City of La Quinta. Offsite improvements including the proposed substation and well sites may undergo additional environmental review by the appropriate agencies (IID and CVWD respectively). Applicable design/access standards will be determined based on future facility locations and each agency's requirements. Mitigation Measure TRA-2 would substantially reduce the temporary short-term construction related traffic impacts to a level of less than significant. d. Result in Inadequate Emergency Access The Project property is located in a relatively isolated area surrounded on the west and south by undeveloped native desert within and adjacent to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area; on the east by agricultural land and residential communities, and on the north and northeast by Coral Mountain, and the CVWD groundwater recharge facilities and Dike No. 4 impoundment area. North and northeast of this area and beyond Dike 4 are residential communities, vacant parcels that are designated for residential use, and Lake Cahuilla. There is currently no access to the Project property except from an unpaved road from the north which approximates the future alignment of Jefferson Street south of Avenue 58. On the east, Avenue 62 stops at the toe of Dike No. 4 with CVWD gates that restrict access onto Dike 4. Future access would be provided by the permanent extension of Jefferson Street south of Avenue 58, from the extension of Avenue 62 across the dike and the extension of Madison Street south of Avenue 60 and over Dike 4. Evacuation and Access Considerations with Flood Events Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-41 October 2023 671 4.16 TRANSPORTATION The Jefferson Street, Avenue 62 and Madison Street roadway extensions into the Project property will require crossings of the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes and the Dike No. 4 impound levee. The conceptual design for these three all-weather crossings includes the use of a multiple arch bridge. The bridge configuration and sizing shall be determined during the final design. The design shall address freeboard and scour calculations as well as impacts to the dikes. Evacuation and Access Considerations with Fire Events In order to provide secondary and emergency access to the Phase 1 development area, two alternative Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) alignments are identified (see Exhibit 4.16-1 and -2). The easterly EVA alignment extends from the northwesterly edge of Planning Area 6 to the intersection of Madison Street at Avenue 60. The alternative westerly EVA alignment extends from the northwesterly edge of Planning Area 6 to the existing western terminus of Avenue 58. Jefferson Street temporarily ends at the North Loop intersection for Phase 1. This results in an interim roundabout design with the future north and east legs of the intersection temporarily closed. Implementing the interim roundabout configuration provides a turning path for vehicles between the west and south legs of the intersection, rather than an L-shaped (knuckle) intersection. Ultimate roundabout design features at the on -site Project intersections are documented in Section 8.3 of the TIA. Segments of the Loop Road will be constructed at its ultimate full section width as a Collector (40- foot curb -to -curb), with curb and gutters and parkway improvements for the segments of Loop Road located southwest of Jefferson Street, and also northerly from the Jefferson Street/South Loop intersection. All Project roadways, including interim roads and the EVA route, will be paved. The EVA route will remain in place for future use by CVWD (see Exhibit 4.16-2). A Fire Master Plan for the Travertine Specific Plan Project property was established to provide in depth information to aid in determining the level of service proposed for the property during construction and operation of the Project. Emergency response plans and evacuation plans during Project development were established in the Project's Fire Master Plan. For additional discussion of the Fire Master Plan, see Section 4.19, Wildfires, of this EIR. Project construction phasing will occur in three phases, will ensure adequate access at all times, and that complete and adequate public facilities and services are in place and available for the emergency responders, residents and visitors to the community. This includes fire department approved emergency roadway design and facilities including fire hydrants. This access will be available at the proposed Avenue 62 extension and one emergency vehicle access road (EVA) for Development Phase 1a and/or prior to the completion of the Jefferson Street extension. The Avenue 62 access point will be designed to have 3 lanes (2 evacuation lanes and 1 incoming lane to allow for emergency services). Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-42 October 2023 672 4.16 TRANSPORTATION The local onsite loop street will have a typical right-of-way of 70 feet, with curb -to -curb distances of 40 feet with 9-foot curb -adjacent landscaped parkways and a 6-foot-wide pedestrian walkway on both sides in all Project phases. Additionally, local roads are planned to be utilized within the Project. The local roads will be comprised of a curb -to -curb paved section of 32 feet with single loaded parking and 36 feet if double loaded. Street parking will only be allowed on the loaded side of the street. Construction of the selected EVA will be required prior to occupancy of Development Phase 1a. City staff, including Police and Fire Department staff, would review site plans and provide conditions of approval that are specific to the provision of emergency access on a project -by -project basis. The development of the roads is not anticipated to impact the evacuation plan and routes within the region. Evacuation and Access Considerations On -site Project Design The extension of the secondary arterial connection between Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 will be an ungated public road. Gated access, if any, will serve the uphill and downhill portions of the Project, both of which are in the loop roads that are connected to the Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 arterial road. A possible third gate is proposed at the entry to the Resort/Spa (PA-2) and individual residential areas. Gates located at the entrances to the residential planning areas and the Resort/Spa will not restrict access to the property for emergency services. Each gate will include a keyed emergency lock box such as the Knox Box to provide access to emergency vehicles, in addition, the completion of Jefferson Street, including the interim cross section between Avenue 58 and the Project's northern boundary, the full cross section through the Project property and the interim/revised cross section connecting with Avenue 62, east of the Project property, will provide a new access for existing and future residential neighborhoods such as the Quarry located at the western terminus of Avenue 58, and the proposed Coral Canyon project located south of the intersection of Avenue 58 and Jefferson and through which the proposed Jefferson Street extension will pass. Individual neighborhoods within the residential planning areas may also be gated at the discretion of future developers. The location of any proposed gates must be reviewed and approved by the City as part of either a tentative tract map application or as a part of a site plan review application. At this time, City staff including police and fire department staff would review site plans and provide conditions of approval that are specific to the provision of emergency access on a project -by -project basis. Design standards for the main road through the Project site that will be created by the extension of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 are included in the Project as design features. Mitigation Measure TIA-1 provides offsite roadway improvement requirements. Additionally, all roadway design shall be reviewed and approved by the City and Fire Department. With implementation of mitigation measures, standard conditions, and design features, including roadway design review and approval, impacts associated with the emergency access would be reduced to a less than significant impact. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-43 October 2023 673 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 4.16.5 Cumulative Impacts Year 2040 Conditions Traffic Analysis This section discusses the results of the General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) HCM intersection analysis and roadway segment capacity analysis for conditions at Project Buildout. This analysis is designed to determine if the roadway classifications and prescribed improvements set forth in the City of La Quinta Circulation Element are adequate to accommodate future project and other traffic at the target LOS, or if additional mitigation is necessary. This section provides recommended intersection and segment lanes to provide acceptable levels of service for three roadway network scenarios. General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension Conditions The roadway network for the proposed Project includes a temporary and a permanent extension of Madison Street south from Avenue 60 to the Project property. It is envisioned as a secondary/emergency access that, once Project buildout has occurred, will be closed from public use and be accessible only for emergency vehicles, CVWD maintenance vehicles and as an evacuation route. The following presents the expected operating conditions on Project roadways and intersections with the inclusion of Madison Street. It also evaluates 2040 LOS operations without the Madison Street extension. Intersection Operations Analysis A potentially significant cumulative traffic impact is defined to occur at any study area roadway segment if the Project would cause the Existing LOS to fall to worse than LOS D for Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects traffic conditions. A potentially significant cumulative traffic impact is also defined to occur on any study area roadway segment that is already operating at LOS E or LOS F, if the Project traffic will increase the V/C ratio by more than 0.02 for Opening Year Cumulative with Project traffic conditions (see table 4.16-3 for V/C ratios and associated LOS). A potentially significant cumulative traffic impact at an unsignalized study area intersection occurs when, with Project traffic included, an intersection has a projected LOS F on a side street for a two- way stop control or LOS E or worse for an all -way stop controlled intersection and the addition of Project traffic results in an addition of 3 seconds or more of delay for any movement. In general, cumulative traffic impacts occur with or without the Project. The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension conditions are consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan buildout (2035) intersection configurations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-44 October 2023 674 4.16 TRANSPORTATION LOS calculations were conducted for the study area intersections to evaluate their operations under General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension traffic conditions. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 4.16-21. All intersections are anticipated to experience acceptable operations under General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension conditions with improvements including the following intersection lane recommendations: • General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) With Madison Street Extension (Existing General Plan). This scenario includes the following: 1. Future Madison Street extension, south of Avenue 60 to Avenue 62. 2. Future Jefferson Street connection from Avenue 58 to Avenue 62. • General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) Without Madison Street Extension (GPA Option 1). This scenario includes the following: 1. Termination of Madison Street as a General Plan roadway, south of Avenue 60. 2. Future Jefferson Street connection from Avenue 58 to Avenue 62. 3. Emergency vehicle access (EVA) is provided via Madison Street, from the northerly boundary of the Project's Planning Area 18 to Avenue 60. Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis The roadway segment capacities are approximate figures and are typically used at the General Plan level to assist in determining the roadway functional classification (number of through lanes) needed to meet future forecasted traffic demand. Table 4.16-21 provides a summary of the General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension traffic conditions roadway segment capacity analysis based on the City of La Quinta roadway segment capacity thresholds identified previously in Table 4.16-18. As shown on Table 4.16-22, The study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension traffic conditions. However, one roadway segment along Madison Street, between Avenue 54 and Airport Boulevard appears to exceed the theoretical daily segment LOS thresholds. It should be noted that where the peak hour roadway segment analysis indicates a deficiency (unacceptable LOS), a review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis is undertaken. Further review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis indicates that the recommended improvements at adjacent study area intersections provide acceptable level of service. Therefore, roadway segment widening is not anticipated. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-45 October 2023 675 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-21 includes "Bolded" text. If Delay and/or LOS is Bold, this indicates an unacceptable condition with an existing traffic control mechanism. If Traffic Control is bold, RDB indicates a proposed Project roundabout improvement and TS indicates a proposed traffic signal improvement in compliance with the General Plan. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. 4.16-21 Intersection Analysis for 2040 Conditions with Madison Street Extension Conditions ID Intersection Traffic Control' Delay (in seconds)' Level of Service' AM PM AM PM 1 Madison St. / Avenue 58 TS 35.8 54.7 D D 2 Madison St. / Airport Blvd. TS 24.9 30.6 C C 3 Madison St. / Avenue 54 TS 41.7 54.3 D D 4 Madison St. / Avenue 52 TS 52.1 54.0 D D 5 Madison St. / Avenue 50 TS 40.8 53.1 D D 6 Jefferson St. / Avenue 54 TS 21.2 39.4 C D 7 Jefferson St. / Avenue 52 RDB 5.8 8.3 A A 8 Jefferson St. / Avenue 50 TS 42.8 44.7 D D 9 Monroe St. / Avenue 62 TS 32.1 29.0 C C 10 Monroe St. / Avenue 60 TS 37.1 46.6 D D 11 Monroe St. / Avenue 58 TS 41.4 54.2 D D 12 Monroe St. / Airport Blvd. TS 33.6 42.3 C D 13 Monroe St. / Avenue 54 TS 32.0 54.7 C D 14 Monroe St. / Avenue 52 TS 38.3 54.7 D D 15 Monroe St. / 50th Avenue TS 34.2 54.7 C D 16 Jackson St. / Avenue 62 TS 44.4 38.9 D D 17 Jackson St. / Avenue 60 TS 37.6 45.2 D D 18 Jackson St. / 58th Avenue TS 27.5 35.8 C D 19 Jackson St. / Airport Blvd. TS 38.4 39.1 D D 20 Jefferson St. / N. Loop RDB 5.7 7.0 A A 21 Jefferson St. / S. Loop RDB 5.9 7.3 A A 22 Madison St./Avenue 60 TS 48.4 49.1 D D 23 Madison St./Avenue 62 TS 14.4 25.5 B C Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 1-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. 1. RDB = Improvement; TS= improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012) 2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 analysis software. Bold = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e. unacceptable LOS) 3. TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -street Stop; AWS = All -Way Stop; RDB = Roundabout Table 4.16-22 includes "Bolded" text. If Through Travel Lanes is bold, the number indicates a proposed additional lane improvement in compliance with the General Plan. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-46 October 2023 676 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-22 Roadway Segment Volume/Capacity Analysis for 2040 Conditions With Madison Street Extension Conditions Roadway Segment Roadway Designation Through Travel Lanes' Z Capacity 3 ADT Volume/ Capacity Ratio West of Madison St. Secondary 4 28,000 12,000 0.43 Ave 58 West of Monroe St. Secondary 4 28,000 10,200 0.36 West of Jackson St. Secondary 4 28,000 18,600 0.66 Madison St. South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 35,600 0.84 60th Ave West of Jackson St. Primary 4 42,600 12,000 0.28 Ave 62 West of Monroe St. Modified Secondary 2 19,000 9,600 0.51 West of Jackson St. Secondary 4 28,000 19,800 0.71 South of Ave 60 Secondary 4 28,000 19,000 0.68 Monroe St. South of Ave 58 Primary 4 42,600 26,000 0.61 South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 25,000 0.59 Jackson St. South of Airport BI Primary 4 42,600 28,400 0.67 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 2-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. Notes: 1. 1=Existing number of lanes: 1=City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout number of lanes 2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (July 2015) 3. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic signal warrant analyses have been performed at all applicable unsignalized study area intersections for General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension traffic conditions. Three additional study area intersections (Jackson Street at Avenue 62, Jackson Street at Avenue 60, and Jackson Street at Avenue 58) are anticipated to warrant traffic signals beyond those warranted for EAPC conditions. General Plan Buildout (Year 2040 This scenario includes the removal of Madison Street as a General Plan Street south of Avenue 60. Madison Street roadway improvements will terminate at Avenue 60 as is the current condition. Intersection Operations Analysis The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension conditions are consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan buildout (2035) intersection configurations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-47 October 2023 677 4.16 TRANSPORTATION LOS calculations were conducted for the study intersections to evaluate their operations under General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension traffic conditions. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 4.16-23. Four intersections require modifications to the previously identified improvements for General Plan buildout conditions if either of the following scenarios occur: • General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension (GPA) Intersection improvements will be funded by a combination of Capital Improvement Funds (CIP) and Development Impact Fees (DIF). General Plan Circulation Element (GPCE) improvements are improvements anticipated and analyzed in the General Plan. The four intersections which would require modification are as follows: • Madison Street at Avenue 58 - o CIP (GPCE): install CIP-Funded traffic signal control; one westbound right (WBR) overlap phase o Modified GPCE: 2nd northbound left (NBL) and northbound right (NBR) overlap phase; 2nd southbound left (SBL) lane and 1 eastbound right (EBR) lane. • Monroe Street at Avenue 62- o CIP (GPCE): Install CIP-funded traffic signal; 1 shared NBL/through (T)/R lane; 1 eastbound left (EBL) turn lane; 1 WBR with overlap phase. o Modified GPCE: 1 SBL and southbound right (SBR) overlap; modify EBT/R to shared EBL/T/R lanes; 1 WBL lane • Monroe Street at Avenue 60 o CIP (GPCE): Install CIP-funded traffic signal, 2nd NBT lane, 2nd SBT lane, 2nd EBT lane; 1 WBL, 1 WBR w/overlap o Modified GPCE: 1 SBR lane; 1 EBR with overlap phase; second WBT lane • Monroe Street at Avenue 58 o CIP (GPCE): Install CIP-funded traffic signal; 2nd NBT lane, 1 NBR lane; 1 SBL, 2nd SBT lane; 1 EBL, 2nd EBT lane; 1 WBL, 2nd WBT lane. o Modified GPCE: 2nd NBL and NBR overlap phase, 2nd SBL lane, 1 EBR lane. As shown in Table 4-16-23, below, all intersections are anticipated to experience acceptable operations under General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension conditions with improvements. If Delay and/or LOS is Bold, this indicates an unacceptable condition with an existing traffic control mechanism. If Traffic Control is bold, RDB indicates a proposed Project roundabout improvement and TS indicates a proposed traffic signal improvement in compliance with the General Plan. General Plan Circulation Element (GPCE) and Modified GPCE Improvements are described above. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-48 October 2023 678 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-23 Intersection Analysis for 2040 Conditions without Madison Street Extension Conditions ID Intersection Traffic Control3 Delay (in seconds)Z Level of Service AM PM AM PM 1 Madison St. / Avenue 58 -With GPCE Update Improvements TS 37.7 67.8 D E -With Modified GPCE Improvements TS 33.2 51.5 C D 2 Madison St. / Airport Blvd. TS 24.7 28.8 C C 3 Madison St. / Avenue 54 TS 41.7 51.7 D D 4 Madison St. / Avenue 52 TS 50.9 53.6 D D 5 Madison St. / Avenue 50 TS 39.8 50.1 D D 6 Jefferson St. / Avenue 54 TS 23.5 49.0 C D 7 Jefferson St. / Avenue 52 RDB 5.9 9.1 A A 8 Jefferson St. / Avenue 50 TS 40.5 43.1 D D 9 Monroe St. / Avenue 62 -With GPCE Update Improvements TS 53.0 137.3 D F -With Modified GPCE Improvements TS 42.3 53.8 D D 10 Monroe St. / Avenue 60 -With GPCE Update Improvements TS 45.4 103.3 D F -With Modified GPCE Improvements TS 42.9 52.6 D D 11 1 Monroe St. / Avenue 58 -With GPCE Update Improvements TS 51.2 77.8 D E -With Modified GPCE Improvements TS 39.1 51.8 D D 12 Monroe St. / Airport Blvd. TS 33.9 44.7 C D 13 Monroe St. / Avenue 54 TS 32.4 54.6 C D 14 Monroe St. / Avenue 52 TS 38.2 54.4 D D 15 Monroe St. / 50th Avenue TS 36.0 54.9 D D 16 Jackson St. / Avenue 62 TS 47.4 40.7 D D 17 Jackson St. / Avenue 60 TS 38.0 54.8 D D 18 Jackson St. / 58th Avenue TS 29.7 36.8 C D 19 Jackson St. / Airport Blvd. TS 39.0 40.1 D D 20 Jefferson St. / N. Loop RDB 6.1 8.4 A A 21 Jefferson St. / S. Loop RDB 6.4 8.9 A A 22 Madison St./Avenue 60 TS 35.1 53.3 D D Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 1-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. 1. RDB = Improvement; TS= improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012) 2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 analysis software. Bold = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e. unacceptable LOS) 3. TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -street Stop; AWS = All -Way Stop; RDB = Roundabout 4. Since roundabout analysis in Synchro is limited to a maximum of 2 lanes per approach, traffic has been utilized at this location (similar to the City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout TIA worksheets.) Roadway Segments Capacity Analysis Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-49 October 2023 679 4.16 TRANSPORTATION The roadway segment capacities are approximate figures and are typically used at the General Plan level to assist in determining the roadway functional classification (number of through lanes) needed to meet future forecasted traffic demand. Table 4.16-24 provides a summary of the General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension (GPA) traffic conditions roadway segment capacity analysis based on the City roadway segment capacity thresholds identified previously. As shown on Table 4.16-24, the study roadway segments analyzed are projected to operate at acceptable LOS for General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) without Madison Street Extension (GPA) traffic conditions with roadway improvements. However, one roadway segment along Madison Street, between Avenue 54 and Airport Boulevard (Avenue 56) appears to exceed the theoretical daily segment LOS thresholds. It should be noted that where the peak hour roadway segment analysis indicates a deficiency (unacceptable LOS), a review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis is undertaken. Further review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis indicates that the recommended improvements at adjacent study area intersections will provide acceptable level of service. Therefore, the need for roadway segment widening is not anticipated. If in the table below Through Travel Lanes is bold, the number indicates a proposed additional lane improvement in compliance with the General Plan. Improvements are further described within the Transportation Mitigation Monitoring section of this DEIR. Table 4.16-24 Roadway Segment Volume/Capacity Analysis for 2040 Conditions Without Madison Street Extension Conditions Roadway Segment Roadway Designation Through Travel Lanes' z Capacity 3 ADT Volume/ Capacity Ratio West of Madison St. Secondary 4 28,000 12,500 0.45 Ave 58 West of Monroe St. Secondary 4 28,000 14,000 0.50 West of Jackson St. Secondary 4 28,000 19,000 0.68 Madison St. South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 34,000 0.80 60th Ave West of Jackson St. Primary 4 42,600 15,000 0.35 Ave 62 West of Monroe St. Modified Secondary 2 19,000 13,000 0.68 West of Jackson St. Secondary 4 28,000 19,000 0.68 South of Ave 60 Secondary 4 28,000 25,000 0.89 Monroe St. South of Ave 58 Primary 4 42,600 27,000 0.63 South of Ave 56 Primary 4 42,600 26,000 0.61 [Jackson St. South of Airport BI Primary 4 42,600 29,000 0.68 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 2-4, Urban Crossroads, November 2020. Notes: 4. 1=Existing number of lanes: 1=City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout number of lanes 5. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (July 2015) Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-50 October 2023 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 6. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day. Cumulative Growth Traffic A trip generation summary of cumulative projects is shown in Table 4.16-25, Cumulative Development Trip Generation Summary. Where applicable, the traffic generated by individual cumulative projects was manually added to the Opening Year Cumulative forecasts to ensure that traffic generated by the listed cumulative development projects in Table 4.16-25 are reflected as part of the background traffic. Table 4.16-25 Cumulative Development Trip Generation Summary AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID Project/Location Land Use Quantityl In Out Total In Out Total Daily Pavillion Palms 1 Shopping Center pp g 125 TSF 111 68 179 334 361 695 7,851 Shopping Center Silver Rock - Phase 1 Hotel 140 RM 55 39 94 48 50 98 1,249 Hotel 200 RM 78 56 134 68 72 140 1,784 2 Silver Rock - Phase 2 Residential Condo/Townhouse 255 DU 18 94 112 89 43 132 1,482 Subtotal 151 189 340 205 165 370 4,515 Residential La Quinta Penthouses Condo/Townhouse 8 DU 1 3 4 3 1 4 46 Mountain Village 3 Residences Apartment 6 DU 1 2 3 2 1 3 40 High Turnover (Sit- Crabpot 1.8 TSF 11 9 20 11 7 18 229 Down) Restaurant Subtotal 13 14 27 16 9 25 315 Residential (Senior/ 4 Polo Community2 Single Family 859 DU 87 185 272 210 136 346 4,073 Detached) Estates at Griffin Lake Single Family Detached 78 DU 15 44 59 49 29 78 743 Griffin Ranch 5 Single Family Detached 4 DU 1 2 3 3 1 4 38 Amendment Subtotal 16 46 62 52 30 82 781 Monterra Single Family Detached 40 DU 8 22 30 25 15 40 381 Residential (west of Monroe, north of Single Family Detached 11 DU 2 6 8 7 4 11 105 Monterra) 6 Residential (west of Monroe, north of Single Family Detached 40 DU 8 22 30 25 15 40 381 Estates at La Quinta Subtotal 18 50 68 57 34 91 867 7 Signature at PGA Single Family Detached 230 DU 44 129 173 145 85 230 2,190 West The Shops at Coral Shopping Center 105.071 TSF 100 61 161 297 322 619 7,012 8 Mountain Pass -By (25%) -25 -15 -40 -74 -81 -155 -1,753 Subtotal 75 46 121 223 241 464 5,259 Andalusia at Coral 9 Single Family Detached 39 DU 7 22 29 25 14 39 371 Mountain Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-51 October 2023 681 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Andalusia Village Single Family Detached 71 DU 13 40 1 53 45 26 1 71 676 Subtotal 20 62 82 70 40 110 1,047 Estate Collection at 10 Single Family Detached 57 DU 11 32 43 36 21 57 543 Coral Mountain 11 Coral Canyon Single Family Detached 219 DU 42 123 165 138 81 219 2,085 Bellesera Single Family Detached 320 DU 61 179 240 202 118 320 3,046 12 Vista Soleada4 Residential/Equestrian _ 45 130 175 146 86 232 2,197 Way Station Subtotal 106 309 415 348 204 552 5,243 Villas at Indian Single Family Detached 15 DU 3 8 11 9 6 15 143 Springs Contour Dermatology Medical -Dental Office 5.554 TSF 10 3 13 6 14 20 201 13 American Tire Depot Tire Store 6.72 TSF 12 7 19 12 16 28 167 Regency Marinita Health/Fitness Club 37.776 TSF 27 27 54 76 57 133 1,244 New Fitness Center Subtotal 52 45 97 103 93 196 1,755 Canyon Ridge Single Family Detached 74 DU 14 41 55 47 27 74 704 Fast Food w/ Drive El Pollo Loco 2.66 TSF 62 59 121 45 42 87 1,320 Thru 14 Single Family Detached 152 DU 29 85 114 96 56 152 1,447 The Centre La Quinta5 Hotel 125 RM 39 28 67 39 36 75 1,021 Subtotal 144 213 357 227 161 388 4,492 Shopping Center 103.972 TSF 99 60 159 295 320 615 6,965 Mayer Villa Capri Medical -Dental Office 130.45 TSF 247 65 312 130 335 465 4,713 Washington St. 15 Apartment 26 DU 3 11 14 10 6 16 173 Apartments Subtotal 349 136 485 435 661 1,096 11,851 1 Cumulative Development Grand Total 1,296 1,815 3,111 2,788 2,433 5,221 55,723 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Table 4-3, Urban Crossroads, April 2018. Trip Generation; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 9`" Edition (2012) Notes: 1. DU = Dwelling Units; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Rooms 2. Source: Polo Community TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (June 2017).' 3. Source: Shops at Coral Mountain TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (November 2009). 4. Source: Vista Soleada (TTM 36590) TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (December 2013). 5. Source: The Centre La Quinta TIA (Draft), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (June 2017) Cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Project traffic are evaluated under Year 2040 Conditions Traffic Analysis in the TIA as described in this Transportation Section. Project impacts will not be cumulatively considerable with the implementation of the design recommendations found in the TIA and as set forth below in the subsequent Mitigation Measures Under CEQA Threshold b, travel demand modeling of VMT for the Project based upon City of La Quinta guidelines, indicates a potentially significant impact relative to VMT for residential uses. The estimated 12.59 home -based VMT per resident is more than the City's VMT residential significance threshold and a significant and unmitigable VMT impact. Cumulatively considerable impacts are anticipated relative to the Project's residential VMT. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-52 October 2023 682 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 4.16.6 Mitigation Measures The following Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 and the following Mitigation Measures are presented in the TIA and include a combination of physical improvements and fee payments (DIF, CIP and TUMF) that will address the need for the identified improvements. Improvements are a combination of General Plan Circulation Element (GPCE) mandated improvements as well as modified improvements identified in the TIA process. Improvements are presented relative to construction phasing and some improvements are reflected in multiple phases. Improvements are intended to mitigate impacts created and/or increased by the proposed Project. Buildout of the Project, in conjunction with General Plan (2040) buildout conditions will result in potential impacts, without improvements. However, with the implementation of Project and CIP- programmed improvements, cumulative transportation impacts (other than VMT) will be reduced to less than significant levels. TRA-1 Project mitigation may include a combination of a fair share of fee payments to the affected jurisdiction, construction of specific improvements and reimbursement to the Project proponent to account for proponent fair share of improvement, or a combination of these approaches. The Summary of 2040 Intersection Improvements (Table 4.16-26) are set forth below, are feasible and will mitigate Project impacts for all three access options discussed above to levels that are less than significant. The following improvements are recommended by the TIA: • Monroe Street at Avenue 52(#14) — Install traffic signal control; Provide separate northbound left turn lane, provide second northbound through lane. • Monroe Street at Avenue 60 (#10) — Construct traffic signal improvements for eventual reimbursement via the City of La Quinta. In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ SIB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane ■ EB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane with right turn overlap phase ■ WB Approach: Provide 2nd through lane • Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1) — Install traffic signal control; provide second eastbound through lane. In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: EB Approach: Convert inside through lane into 2nd left turn lane. • Madison Street at Avenue 54 (#3) — Install traffic signal control; Convert eastbound de facto right turn lane into free right turn lane. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-53 October 2023 683 4.16 TRANSPORTATION • Jefferson Street at Avenue 50 (#8) — Provide second westbound through lane. (This intersection is located in both the City of La Quinta and the City of Indio. The proposed improvement is in the City of Indio.) • Jefferson Street at Avenue 54 (#6) — Install traffic signal control, convert 2nd eastbound through lane into right turn lane, provide westbound right turn overlap phasing. • Monroe Street at Avenue 58 (#11) — Install traffic signal control, provide separate northbound left turn lane, provide separate northbound right turn lane, provide separate southbound left turn lane, provide separate eastbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound left turn lane; Provide separate northbound left turn lane. In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ NB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane, add right turn overlap phase to right turn lane ■ SB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane ■ EB Approach: Provide separate right turn lane • Monroe Street at Airport Blvd (#12) — Install traffic signal control • Monroe Street at Avenue 54 (#13) — Install traffic signal control, provide separate southbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound left turn lane; provide second northbound through lane, provide second southbound through lane. • Jefferson Street at Avenue 52 (#7) — reconstruct the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes around the center island to accommodate an additional through lane in the northbound and southbound directions. • Jackson Street at Avenue 58 (#18) — Install traffic signal control (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside). • Jackson Street at Airport Boulevard (#19) — Install traffic signal control. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside. ) • Monroe Street at Avenue 62 (#9) — Install traffic signal control, provide northbound shared left -through -right lane, provide separate eastbound left turn lane, provide separate westbound right turn lane. (This intersection is located in the City of La Quinta at the northwest corner, and in the County of Riverside at the northeast, southwest and southeast corners). In addition to General Plan geometrics, provide the following lanes: ■ SB Approach: Provide 2nd left turn lane, add right turn overlap phase to existing right turn lane ■ EB Approach: Convert through -right lane into left -through -right lane Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-54 October 2023 684 4.16 TRANSPORTATION ■ WB Approach: Provide separate left turn lane • Jackson Street at Avenue 62 (#16) — Install traffic signal control. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside.) • Jackson Street atAvenue 60 (#17) —Provide traffic signal. (This intersection is located in the County of Riverside.) Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-55 October 2023 685 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Table 4.16-26 Summary of 2040 Intersection Improvements RCLLI' IInZ l.�II InYpY tiox,7•2 I 4uiTck Fmh Slum VW WA op r.26 3 E wb nr ELk49CCFerrer�l I 9;,Alip:r•11! mm w1%)IrkblwtMAtl5"e&M fyr4ici_: Gtf-xis lA GM I�. I -i •r, .tr fbd kin .R*+ Pdopkj . 53V%4 �AKU" rp�k W - S,_ Plar "A�Rl1 aClbp-2 ,Y;: ''.'�_• -_Z§%TLb ❑,4IIId +IUlm! aI:ffK.` I !Lp• _ �. -� Y I =L:16.C•57 i p,d f� jfpr�+AQ{,'k!f� ■ 'i• i ' V.- i ■ i-A. r i kj • '_IP r %0R-r%xrbpphxx +Swet • Ssfie iIMIMAEl ancrg wnrnQ. 1m: _• =ht"ryEBkpdtnmaro !3+rrrt rpr: rrnwfol.)GO ] FSirr an.{ I SS. t C'rM icf La Cllrmn 1aadl TWIkQrd -50-t 7ti t Pael�x •']M"Vrftre •3rrne 56--le It l.ra. 7Nr 7y' 5VP rlc r W" I)qw ap Ftme Aq" # yLsdhom 5� f C{r t#•! n �u M Ayerwe�: CaycfIndia r 2nd.1dKL3ae +5ast *5are LgQuhk�! 55k �T- Rai +zndVL2M5*1A1SM *S•F'Le 4.srm q • j MA hm.:.cn■ ■ • iaT.. Z h4idhQ4 t t Cw d L- Q u ry Y A.INAS9 CAhKrIMIG 1IftaSt77C1,1FAW +731t a3kT� - M AL bwsv.•4� � `W, *Same Li rk 4k{ {� • end , 1 WeN Y.f ay ir5ap -Same -5 ioVwSLj CADfrLaOwma b 1*qa1Er4 fKSom ■&a' e • °,•j'r1E 4A¢ •rid 1:M w/ an F r k�pRLgE)c TS W—M JrfParaa 51. � La a,L•ra F 3rwcr La Quriq + 3*m nxmxbbmt , Sa 1: 3t* 37L ihiY'" S: rjD b J Wif La QW—' * 2AIN L Wr aria! +fine ' szrr{ Li QL'hLi A► wtr•94 awe? Ina1a nd hr:o. 2r.a ".e-r +Ssrsb ,-Sm 9 W-4%rrp Sr j tar ¢ Lh Ocsm3Y i t,ml1 Tmtfi[{WuI +r nct a•�7rc �WDW61 CDWL-L'N-5Psrdrs & 3 9%:W iMS tM - frp lwwp .rya ,"k+p= i j rM wrl h>•Ik• •j:§�C a.c h , r'I� i 1 w6R rn h 71m. a-p Fhme +SJaflt base +] 5A! andSOR weft 5t*Ye *iAD3n EBS+R i Y 5amC r0"' A wed --%Tf A ]n Ord L. Cbmnl.' • Iidwl TmOlt Upol -Sara■ • �r� k+4� 5ri 'Olin' a3a%ee • cnd 11 djr ILae -Sm-e 'Sere L-''•..L• V km - aw ZT Hjr ate$ • 1 K,3w"wj4a•er4p *;%SIR rile •] 47 r<r*E7.ow Map p�,+•s o+a * Lm wtr J3'RE' Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-56 October 2023 4.16 TRANSPORTATION l�etia ,tie,kie flnipr xrtr„� BYoxt r3u siat{?z� WAopm^:l o-A Gua#v 4tatrik Plm WA QVlk- t RxnArr. firnn, 4h4 *M 0 irlivxO# Kr Jva3:. rn I Mo dr on ie wr��rrtcv� }+SM�is 4sdtsot rhwl Jhoa�d�e� sr i irf hgom I erfGmk*-1 A! Trf? Rhn Qm"m S qrtlon 1 = >,'c-raa5ti.r 3•r'-TLALkiwW Fs gW:Lraf H-5oD)d wn +S7ir1r ruww 5$ [n utv of pvvr-�,dr - 2nd m5T.1 Mm • 5.,Jm • 5ame $ �Llih4b . J 5!� "fib' �r�G I {ame r Same ■1Em- a'rd [f2rilre q 54" •5ame -] NJL 2.1d W5T bne -Wr! -&Ltr+t rk% ' AdMtW6dfQ¢L ms AlWam GPLE grwow ffw 1'2M 4E4 8 aP$R'aw5r#; +Snrr>r Tg� + 2-nd SOL F•5mrrlt r 1 ERR i 5rr��e 7ar�P1 2 ;`.'c-me pt. i M.DF La 12UM r h T•7fflC 97rt1 r 3ame tigF . LYne EvusW of PAA3,mdt ■ 2Pd 057 -brie a same ;k5 !do- S% F 2hd MT + Same +5amt ; S� -7 uLX 2nAWB T,7 %Mvd emu �M� rham sa U r4toQuirba' -�-N a NFFeS�w4 • ierrt •;amr L&a Dy at iNk%rm;BI, JhNN d tjfm 462nw 15ESL, 2M SBfT, 11�1 d.&MM F �me 4 P� 2% 4% • ind TM i� Zr d svr, =cIM • Y'Km L Spmc ■ ] Wilt Ltd Wlrr. ] 1%W S&M * 5am'! 'a l{OH{ti-SC i m%.4LJrx,L-W -r.aUTNFF sy,.l -4.nv •ym. A,wLem Cky F "n .j - ] NSL. 2M ham, 7 W •.�.m. • yma La C4rd� or kkgri u ■ Zrsd SK Siftla Eamo .4r r,x - b3d M - i71FrFe - M1.K me t 1 WSd r Same r 52me fS hdoaYr� it , My ad Indb t 2ho Mk' ]AM I•5zm •Same WdI AmlpuP +2pdSOL +Sa,S� kS�Ttr TWA Zb% � ■ 2 m d ZST q R,arae • Sa' ft F 2 M kWBT ' S'rm * Same 1'•xk:p�5k� EryofInd- .rrwIT.aATCEp" a Same -Same �2ndA4tnnt +1hEL,3M•hff' d &Eama -j �Ck_ _�-d56, -Same •Same I! r•- 1)70 :r'. t1m1UA rSarre FEamt • 1 MW 2M Wl r Some 17 ak: G.yhf Ids F kuwI %S C r.,WA 5mm FSanm at -] ML, 2M WT • �Ji +rim■ ■ 7 54j- a-d 56r + Same 4 Mrrx - 1 WEL lid VdBT. ] O&Awti - !:um +ern■ � Af711 �..Uw +Samr Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-57 October 2023 687 4.16 TRANSPORTATION iii ffm%A;d I•aprt urrr a.c� n.grtrt sr-s-f.,j d#,t4j?9&M i L'h'ua �rJrtlrLar Ifs 421rr 6F"1 rl riP r.'*FJfx+7, 1.4, G.rrrrl G736 M A ;rt.n.cbam irlowCC UL-Wn'hfalrr.W.ICnrnlrc law4W.i.rl'hmI.&m19b rakwQ IaJrarP^*wLtnr-rAAIiI Saa-w2 ;••r. %rillG rr SLY Ck'4i lnJ;D n55er1'1reC FZA!l 5,-2 'fie LN&,dnJ h1ff1 +irrr r5irmu �LEBL?rd�EV% +imrm f'rm. LWEL1'rdMT +:W" I_r4wd� L9 .k,,?4Ur. S: -f- + iut3;tlrakc Nru1 a swns Snap . L Nk.:ad hfil + Sawn I.�;rm. I L5'S.aRI SIi'. a5m Iunp M -Lea_]rJ ED, -sue •Sam. • L WIL 210 W15T • P�nrt al:•.:v. .e.r I.vyal ii minm • h ti me mi ryrF l vnA ems ' •'wvp F�Grr ilfx' 'L I ' fin ra L.rdAi ul at .%W.r Ar.SEj Cxyj0La 13Jrki• • r.aiA d W A Nftm Saar. • Fr.nra 47tic M1l.i K"3 T i Ir rouddbimui- r M A3c..- L} •+ugh TW+I *"pi •'ant{ idrr•s Ah%, hb:W •INKL.J9F •73h4w+19hjR ,iprn4PMDom :a AdsAL2EATr&] �W-F? • 2n.1.�L %&Yr.Y° ' - San e:1 Wl;Opgr -ri1 LI' LF!j r r4wlap ddw t v&Ijp jpwr p ' I }L?j IImrrr -h1*MF I 1 YmKL.lid %M I earn +lam. kl iil- sLr U-71 dLa 6v 10W •:nrb1 rraf isinrll fxw•N 5? bw" of fiFasrAto • L JBL. 1 °ERR aa .YMv reMw-jcrm3 rvr-ii'ih 1oi*r Map dare we w.V3 TV i 1 - - • I!mT I 1 %0'61, 3 W!J4 Fe.rq f -. 1-4—t;..—O lAdj R-wi+arW—urf;lpishrTalkInp.dJLi ihkMro-"i1. Np ri Ir¢ toCM}G w': rrej bV I r91`.'1 rru0 krte40k h.. ref Sm*h i h G}',I:ftr., a1 (In• Rt T-714 r-?,PXrc+{I;.L- 4FfiLI tIMJ5* IYt G*9L%.IF% 1 Wri4ra i5-etarFkwAtOAd krL.wrFT*,A%!quk; Wvtlie ditw r-Lw, -o M kA alt *GVE dadxeyU ie ur-owWo h7 is "ec1-jj e.�p k Fr+= 1 DiVy kCL�Ar" Sc Lrm him Ilrhrrn wad •Cd, {.cr.wliar cpd"b p+vva ' C".ii.µa_iFdriy,.mronx6*Omr"wknuL.,I.vWo,,Yrmai.LLcrrrlrLc. cwOpimc. 4 QLT of IaGu KK{ tDoi *1 M'k;�MI Fhi0t j "OkrIVI IN z4w 7 ewMr. ay. rN-ri{•T 4rrJr fa79hi-.r ihin kKwv twv FI,r5 ' OCy..'Irrlrrul7{r.., 1.7AI;*-m it r F r rt rl;} rrrk l r R Di!,-T. .Stir-irM Trip rr dr i why IN r. e r rrahv i•+h,r jLV so- .?C� df.i•-F.rsrmti Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-58 October 2023 4.16 TRANSPORTATION TRA-2: Traffic Control Plan Prior to obtaining a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit the City of La Quinta for review and approval detailed construction traffic management plans, including street closure information, detour plans, haul routes, and staging plans as necessary for any off -site work that would encroach on public right-of-way. The construction traffic management plans shall include the following elements, as appropriate: • Provisions for temporary traffic control during all construction activities adjacent to public right-of-way to improve traffic flow on public roadways (e.g., flag person); • Construction -related vehicles shall not park on surrounding public streets; • Provision of safety precautions for pedestrians and bicyclists through such measures as alternate routing and protection barriers; • Schedule construction -related deliveries to reduce travel during peak travel periods; • Obtain the required permits for truck haul routes from the County of Riverside, the City of Rancho Mirage, the City of Palm Desert, and Cathedral City prior to the issuance of any permit for the Project; and • Obtain a Caltrans transportation permit for use of oversized transport vehicles on Caltrans facilities. • Outline adequate measures to ensure emergency vehicle access during all aspects of the Project's construction, including, but not limited to, the use of flagmen during partial closures to streets surrounding the Project site to facilitate the traffic flow until construction is complete. • Include the implementation of security measures during construction in areas that are accessible to the general public to help reduce any increased demand on law enforcement services, including fencing construction areas, providing security lighting, and providing security personnel to patrol construction sites. 4.16.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Implementation of mitigation measures for Project impacts to study area intersections would reduce Project impacts to less than significant levels. With implementation of existing regulations and standards, and Mitigation Measures MM TRA-1 and MM TRA-2, any potential impacts associated with 3 of the 4 traffic and transportation thresholds would remain less than significant (CEQA Thresholds a, c and d). The applicant will undertake appropriate consultation with the City to ensure funding provided by the applicant is sufficient to meet the Project's requirements for traffic improvements, and how these funds would be used to cover the Project's fair share contribution for Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1. Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-59 October 2023 t 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Regarding CEQA Threshold D, Travel demand modeling of VMT for the Project based upon City of La Quinta guidelines indicates a potentially significant impact for residential uses while also indicating the Project's non-residential uses do not exceed VMT thresholds and will not result in a significant VMT impact. This will be the case if project design features are taken into account after the modeling process reduce home -based VMT from 12.98 VMT / resident. However, the estimated 12.59 home - based VMT per resident is more than the City's VMT residential threshold and a VMT impact. Therefore, a significant unavoidable adverse impact related to Residential VMT has been identified. 4.16.8 References 1. Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, May 13, 2020, revised November 5, 2020 2. Travertine Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, Urban Crossroads, November 3, 2020 Travertine Draft EIR 4.16-60 October 2023 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources 4.17.1 Introduction This section discusses the Tribal Cultural Resources that maybe present on or within the area of potential effects (APE) of the Project site and assesses potential direct and indirect impacts on these resources from Project construction and operation, whether the Project may result in potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, and the mitigation measures that are proposed to reduce and avoid such impacts to below a level of significance. The APE also includes a vertical APE of up to 50 feet below ground surface. The APE is depicted in Exhibit 4.5-1. While not included in the Project defined APE, the EIR includes a programmatic assessment of tribal cultural resources impacts associated with wells and an electrical substation to be developed on lands within the off -site utility field east of the Project property. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Addendum to the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants ("SWCA") in 2021, Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Development, prepared by SWCA in 2017, and the Native American Tribal consultations initiated by the City of La Quinta, as required under Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) and Senate Bill 18 (SB 18). Sources used in the preparation are included as Appendix E.1 and Appendix E.2 of this Draft EIR, and in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR. 4,17.2 Existing Conditions Current Natural Setting The Project area is located on the southern -most portion of the City of La Quinta, corporate limits located on the western margin of the eastern Coachella Valley. The Project property is generally isolated from existing development within La Quinta due to its location between natural, development constraining landforms (i.e., Santa Rosa Mountains, Martinez Rockslide, and Coral Mountain) to the west, south and north respectively; engineered dikes (Guadelupe Dike and Dike No. 4) to the north and east respectively; and water replenishment ponds to the east. Portions of the Project property have been subject to agricultural disturbance in the northern portion (approximately 220 acres) of the greater property, while the remainder of the property is undisturbed drainages and desert vegetation. Ethnohistoric Context Ethnographic history is provided in the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report, provided by SWCA and included as Appendix A in the 2021 Addendum to the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report. The Project property is situated within the traditional territory of the Cahuilla (Bean 1978; Kroeber 1925). The Cahuilla are a Native American people that migrated approximately 2,000 to Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-1 October 2023 691 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 3,000 years ago to the inland areas of southern California most likely from the southern Sierra Nevada ranges of east -central California (Moratto 1984:559). The Cahuilla traditional territory extended from the present-day City of Riverside to the central portion of the Salton Sea region in the Colorado Desert, and from the San Jacinto Valley to the San Bernardino and Little San Bernardino Mountains. Cahuilla socio-political identity had three main levels. The highest most overarching level was that of cultural nationality, encompassing all Ivi'lyu'atam, otherwise known as the traditional term for the Cahuilla cultural identity. The next level was a division of two patrimonies, with each patrimonial clan belonging to either the tuktum (Wildcats) or the 'istam (Coyotes). Within these two overarching patrimonies is the third level of organization, which consists of a collection of individual patrimonial clans called sibs (Bean 1978: 580). The separate lineages within the clans cooperated in many, including defense, subsistence activities, and religious ceremonies, and although most lineages had their own village and resource area, most of Cahuilla territory was considered communal property. The sibs' individual territories within the Coachella Valley desert were formed around natural springs and alluvial fans spreading out from mountain canyons to maximize the use of natural resources. The villages were occupied year-round, with groups leaving for hunting, gathering, visiting other villages, or trade between villages. The relationship between individual patrilineal groups and different sibs were maintained through intermarriage and ceremonial reciprocity (Bean 1972). Each lineage had houses (kish), granaries for food storage, and ramadas (shades) for working and cooking. Villages also had sweat houses and song houses for non -religious music, and each village had a separate house for the lineage or clan leader. A separate ceremonial house was used for major religious ceremonies. Spacing between structures was often great, causing villages to extend over a mile in some cases. Resource collection locations for food gathering, hunting, and/or mineral collection were the property of individual patrilineal lineages, and locations considered sacred could only be used by shamans or healers (Bean 1990:2). There were some limited agriculture practices by the Cahuilla prior to European contact. Bean, squash, and corn were grown using techniques likely adopted from Colorado River groups to the east (Bean 1978:578). Corn, pumpkins, and beans were observed being grown by the time of the 1823-1824 Romero Expedition (Bean and Mason 1962:104). It is also likely that the Cahuilla practiced controlled burning, selective harvesting and pruning, replanting, seed distribution, and limited irrigation (Bean and Lawton 1993). Cahuilla material culture consisted of a variety of tools to gather and collect food resources, including the bow and arrow, traps, nets, slings, and hunting blinds. Some of the food -processing tools included portable and bedrock mortars, basket hopper mortars, pestles, manos, metates, bedrock grinding slicks, hammerstones, anvils, leaching baskets, bone saws, knives, and wooden drying racks. Food consumption was facilitated by woven baskets and carved wood and ceramic vessels. Pottery was introduced to the Cahuilla during the Late Prehistoric period through trade with Yuman -speaking groups across the Colorado River, and ceramic production using the paddle -and -anvil technique was adopted later. Typical ceramic vessels included jars, cooking vessels, ladles, ollas (large round pots with small Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-2 October 2023 692 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES necks), and pipes. 011as were sometimes filled with foodstuffs, sealed, and cached in caves and rock shelters for later consumption (Bean 1978:578-579). Spanish mission outposts were established at San Bernardino and San Jacinto by 1819, though interactions with Europeans were less intensive in Cahuilla territory than for the coastal native groups because the extreme environment made the area undesirable. By the 1820s, there was constant contact with the ranchos of Mission San Gabriel, and the Cahuilla frequently gained employment from the private rancheros or were relocated to the Mission San Luis Rey. The later Mexican ranchos also provided employment for the Cahuilla. The Bradshaw Trail was established in 1862 as the first major east -west stagecoach and freight line road through Coachella Valley (Bean 1978:583-584). Between 1875 and 1891, the U.S. government established 10 reservations for the Cahuilla within their traditional territory: Agua Caliente, Augustine, Cabazon, Cahuilla, Los Coyotes, Morongo, Ramona, Santa Rosa, Soboba, and Torres -Martinez (Bean 1978:585). Four of these reservations are shared with other Native American groups, including the Chemehuevi, Cupeno, and Serrano. 4,17.3 Regulatory Setting See Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, for a full discussion of the federal and State regulations related to cultural resources that may also be considered Tribal cultural resources. Regulations specifically related to Tribal cultural resources are outlined below. State Senate Bill 18 As of March 1, 2005, California Government Codes 65092; 65351; 65352; 65352.3; 65352.4; 65352.5; and 65560, formerly known as Senate Bill 18 (SB 18), requires that cities and counties contact and consult with Native American Tribes prior to amending or adopting any general plan or specific plan, or designating lands as open space. The purpose of SB 18 is to involve Native Americans at the onset of the planning process to allow for considerations concerning the protection of traditional Tribal cultural places in the context of broad local land use policy prior to individual site -specific, project level land use decisions. Tribes have 90 days from the date on which they receive notification to request consultation, unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the Tribe. At least 45 days before a local government adopts or substantially amends a general plan or specific plan, the local government must refer the proposed action to any Native American Tribes identified by NAHC, for review and comment. California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) In addition to Native American Consultation that occurs as part of the Cultural Resource Assessment, AB 52, which went into effect on July 1, 2015 requires a lead agency to consider a project's impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources ("TCR"). TCR as defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 are as follows: Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-3 October 2023 693 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES (a) "Tribal cultural resources" are either of the following: (1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are either of the following: (A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. (B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1. (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. (b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a Tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. (c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a "nonunique archaeological resource" as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a Tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a). Section 1 (a)(9) of AB 52 establishes that "a substantial adverse change to a Tribal cultural resource has a significant effect on the environment." Effects on Tribal cultural resources should be considered under CEQA. Section 6 of AB 52 adds Section 21080.3.2 to the PRC, which states that parties may propose mitigation measures "capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a Tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a Tribal cultural resource." Further, if a California Native American Tribe requests consultation regarding project alternatives, mitigation measures, or significant effects to Tribal cultural resources, the consultation shall include those topics (PRC Section 21080.3.2[a]). The environmental document and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (where applicable) shall include any mitigation measures that are adopted by the lead agency (PRC Section 21082.3[a]). Under AB 52, the CEQA Lead Agency is required to begin consultation with California Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed Project. Tribal consultation shall be initiated by the CEQA lead agency prior to the release of a Draft EIR by providing notice to the Tribes and within 14 days after an application for an entitlement is deemed completed by the Lead Agency. Once the Lead Agency has contacted necessary Tribal governments, Tribes have 30 days to respond to comments or request for consultation. "Consultation" is the meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and considering carefully the views of others, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties' cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement. Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-4 October 2023 694 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Consultation between government agencies and Native American Tribes must be conducted in a way that is mutually respectful of each party's sovereignty. Consultation must also recognize the Tribes' potential needs for confidentiality with respect to places that have traditional Tribal cultural significance. Consultation concludes when either: the parties agree on measures to mitigate or avoid significant impacts to TCRs or the CEQA Lead Agency concludes that a mutual agreement cannot be reached despite a reasonable and good faith effort by the consulting parties. 4.17.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance Land disturbance and development has the potential to directly and indirectly impact Tribal Cultural Resources within or near a development site. The thresholds analyzed in this section are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and are used to determine the level of potential effects associated with the Project's development and operation. The significance determination is based on the recommended criteria set forth in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, development of the proposed Project would have a significant effect on Tribal cultural resources if it is determined that the Project will: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in significance of a Tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is: i. Listed or is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. Methodology SWCA Environmental Consultants ("SWCA") conducted cultural resource investigations in 2004, 2005 2006, 2017, 2019, 2020 and 2021. The investigations were completed to determine whether significant cultural and historical resources or tribal cultural resources are located within the Project property. The Project boundary and the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE) was modified following the 2006 and 2017 surveys. The final APE is shown in Exhibit 4.5-1, Project Area of Potential Effects, and includes a vertical APE of up to 50 feet below ground surface. The Area of Direct Impact (ADI) is smaller than the APE and comprises the areas where Project construction and development activities may have a direct Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-5 October 2023 695 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES impact affect or impact to cultural resources. The total ADI comprises 557 acres of the APE and excludes the archaeological district (Martinez Mountain Rockslide District) and other tribal cultural resources identified by SWCA in 2017 at the south end of the Project property. The assessments were conducted to determine whether tribal cultural resources are located within the Project property. Tribal consultation was conducted in 2017 and 2020 and thoroughly discussed in SWCA's 2017 Cultural Report and summarized below. Native American Outreach and Coordination Outreach was conducted in 2017 and 2020. In August 2017, the NAHC conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search. The City initiated SB 18- and AB 52-compliant Native American consultation to inform interested parties of the proposed Project and to address any concerns regarding Tribal cultural places or Tribal cultural resources that might be affected by the Project, as required by SB 18 and AB 52 and 36 CFR 800.2(A) of Section 106 of the NHPA, and to determine whether Tribal cultural resources exist in the Project APE. The City of La Quinta sent Tribal consultation letters to eighteen Native American Tribes on August 28, 2017. The letter included a short project description and an explanation of entitlements associated with the proposed Project. The following Tribes were contacted: • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians • Augustine Band of Cahuilla Missions Indians • Cabazon Band of Mission Indians • Cahuilla Band of Indians • Campo Band of Mission Indians • Ewiaapaayp Tribal Office • Jamul Indian Village • La Posta Band of Mission Indians • Los Coyotes Band of Mission Indians • Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation • Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians • Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians • San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians • Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians • Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation • Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians • Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians • Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-6 October 2023 ••• 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Tribes were given thirty days to request consultation under AB 52 and 90 days under SB 18. Three Tribes responded to the City's letters. Tribal responses are discussed in detail in the discussions of Project impacts. In 2020, the City of La Quinta initiated updated tribal consultation with the Native American Tribes that were suggested by the NAHC on March 3, 2020. The City sent the letters to the tribes via email on March 5, 2020. The City did not receive responses from the tribes within the 30-day consultation period. However, the City provided updated project information and cultural resources findings to the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Consultation with these Tribes occurred between July and September 2020 and is discussed in greater detail in the discussions of Project impacts. Project Impact a.i. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource to be listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a Local Registrar of Historical Resources Public Resource Code 21074 identifies "Tribal Cultural Resources" as "sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with culture value to California Native American Tribe" and that are either included or determined to be eligible for inclusion on the national, State, or local register of historic resources or that are determined by the lead agency, in its discretion, to be significant when taking into consideration the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. In August 2021, SWCA prepared an Addendum to the Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development ("Cultural Report") to update the previously completed 2006 and 2017 cultural reports for the Project site (also conducted by SWCA). The 2021 Cultural Report identified 37 previously recorded resources and nine new resources within the Project area of potential effects (APE). Of the 37 previously recorded resources, ten historical or archaeological resources within the Project APE were recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR. They include Sites P-33-001331, P-33- 003872, P-33-003873, P-33-003874, P-33-005323, P-33-014844, P-33-014845, P-33-014846, and P-33- 014847; and P-33-014988. The nine new resources recorded by SWCA during the 2019-2020 efforts included six sites and three isolates. Specifically, the resources consist of two prehistoric isolates, each consisting of two ceramic sherds; one historic isolate consisting of four crushed pull -tab cans; three historic -era refuse scatters; and three prehistoric archaeological sites. None of the newly identified resources were recommended eligible for the NRHP or CRHR. Of the recommended eligible resources, SWCA determined that Site P-33-014988, which included prehistoric milling slicks, is individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The remaining nine resources appear associated with one another and consist of prehistoric milling slicks, ceramic scatter, bedrock milling Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-7 October 2023 697 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES station and a habitation site, and are recommended eligible as contributors to the Martinez Mountain Rockslide District (MMRD). Although not specifically identified as a Tribal Cultural Resource, the MMRD has a temporal affiliation to the Late Prehistoric period that is significant for the prehistory and to the contemporary tribal communities of the region. Based on its association with the Late Prehistoric period, the MMRD is recommended eligible for listing to the NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1, as well as NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4 because it could yield data that are relevant to the prehistory of the region. Table 4.5-1, Cultural Resources, in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, list the previously recorded and new resources and their status, as determined in the Project Cultural Reports, and indicates whether isolated finds (isolates) or archaeological sites were discovered. Based on the Project site investigations conducted between 2006 and 2021, inclusive, SWCA determined that the proposed Project avoids impacts to significant archaeological sites located within the APE. Specifically, the Project boundary avoids disturbances to all historic properties and historic and archaeological resources in and near the APE. A planned open space land use area has been established in the southern portion of the site to buffer identified MMRD resources. This area is currently designated for Open Space Natural uses (Planning Area 20) and will not be developed. The area of direct impacts (ADI), which includes all areas proposed effected by Project construction within the broader APE, completely avoids all resources that are eligible either individually or as contributors to the MMRD. These resources are now located within designated open space natural areas, which allows for their long-term protection and conservation. Although the Project will avoid impacts to cultural resources, the Project applicant shall be required to prepare a monitoring and mitigation program plan to implement strategies for avoiding impacts to Tribal cultural resources, provide cultural sensitivity training to construction crew, and retain a qualified archaeologist and/or a compliance officer to implement the mitigation measures and training, and an archaeological monitor during certain ground -disturbing activities, as well as implement avoidance mechanisms for environmentally sensitive areas. This is required by Mitigation Measure CR-1 through CR-3, and CR-5 through CR-7. Mitigation Measure CR-8 requires that if cultural resources are exposed during excavations, work in the immediate vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the find. See Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR. Off -Site Utility Field SWCA conducted a programmatic review of the off -site utility field area in order to determine whether cultural resources are likely to occur on the site. The programmatic review consisted of SWCA's review of previous survey work, records searches and reports completed for the Project in 2006, 2017, and 2020, as well as environmental literature and previous studies conducted in the vicinity provided by the City of La Quinta. Historical maps and aerial photographs were also examined for historic -era activity within the off -site utility field and a geoarchaeological assessment was conducted to assess the buried Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-8 October 2023 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES site sensitivity of the proposed off -site area. While the record search did not specifically cover the off - site utility field area, some of the results overlapped with the off -site area. In total, 47 cultural resources were previously documented within the off -site utility field area and a 0.5-mile radius, including 16 sites and 31 isolates. SWCA determined that seven (of the 16) sites were located within the off -site utility field area. Five were prehistoric: two with unknown eligibility (P-33-008331 and P-33-008379) and three recommended eligible for the NRHP and CRHR (Temporary #LQ-S-2/CA-RIV-5158, CA-RIV-6109, and CA- RIV-6110). The remaining two were recommended ineligible (CA-RIV-6111/H and CA-RIV-6112/H). The 31 isolates are not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR. The Project property and vicinity are located at the edge of previous stands of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Archaeologists agree that Native American settlements and activity occurred in higher concentrations around permanent water sources, such as Lake Cahuilla. The significance of Lake Cahuilla to the Cahuilla people is well documented in ethnographic works and oral history. Record searches for other adjacent and overlapping projects identified several prehistoric archaeological resources within the western portion of the off -site utility field area and immediate vicinity as well as numerous isolated finds. Therefore, SWCA determined that there is a high density of cultural resources in and around the western edge of the off -site utility field area. Agricultural development within the off -site utility field area has occurred since the 1870s. The agricultural activity in this area may reduce the likelihood of encountering intact prehistoric or historic - period Native American archaeological resources since the highest potential for the presence of archaeological material is in the undisturbed (i.e., native) sediments, which occur below the plow zone. The depth of these sediments has not been confirmed for the off -site utility field area; however, due to the presence of known resources, the location of the off -site utility field area within the lakebed, the likely location of a known and previously identified ethnographic village in the vicinity of the off -site area, and the surrounding dense archaeological landscape, the off -site utility field area appears to have a high sensitivity for prehistoric and historic -era Native American resources. To ensure avoidance of previously identified and any unidentified cultural resources occurring in the utility field, a records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), an updated Sacred Lands File search, and a pedestrian survey of prospective well and substation sites shall be conducted to confirm the presence or absence of potentially sensitive cultural resources shall be required. Additionally, continued outreach to local Tribes and Tribal involvement in site monitoring shall be required. Development should be avoided in areas identified in the Cultural Report, and within the western halves of Section 35 and 26 of Township 6 South, Range 7 East. This is required by Mitigation Measures CR-4, CR-7, and CR-8. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-8 the proposed Project's impact to Tribal cultural resource to be listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a Local Register of Historical Resources is reduced to less than significant levels. Moreover, the proposed distribution lines connecting the substation to other facilities and to the Project would occur Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-9 October 2023 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES within existing rights -of -way, which have already been disturbed. Therefore, the undergrounding of the distribution lines would not result in impacts to Tribal cultural resources. G.H. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. As required by SB 18, AB 52 and 36 CFR 800.2(A) of Section 106 of the NHPA, the City of La Quinta initiated SB 18 and AB 52 Native American consultation in 2017 and 2020 in order to determine whether Tribal cultural resources exist in the Project APE and whether Tribes wished to consult. Eighteen Tribes were contacted with a letter that included a short project description and explanation of entitlements associated with the proposed Project. The City of La Quinta received three responses from Native American Tribes in 2017. The Tribes include Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians, and Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians. The Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians encompass areas within San Diego County. Thus, in their response letter, dated September 5, 2017, the Tribe indicated that no further consultation would be needed unless there were inadvertent discoveries at the site. Katie Croft, the Archaeologist with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) for the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI), responded in a letter dated September 22, 2017. Ms. Croft stated that the Project property is not within the boundaries of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Reservation. However, the Project property is within the Tribe's Traditional Use Area. A records check of the ACBCI Registry identified previous surveys in the area that were positive for the presence of cultural resources. On behalf of the Tribe, Ms. Croft requested the following during consultation: • A copy of the records search with associated survey reports and site records from the information center; • Copies of any cultural resource documentation (report and site records) generated in connection with the Project; • The presence of an approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) during anyground disturbing activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer; and Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-10 October 2023 700 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES • The presence of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of Interior's standards during any ground disturbing activities. In continuing consultation correspondence with the City, Pattie Garcia -Plotkin, Director with the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) for the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI), responded in a letter dated January 12, 2018. Although no specific Tribal cultural resources were identified by the Tribe, on behalf of the Tribe, Ms. Garcia -Plotkin requested the following during consultation: • Formal government to government consultation under California Senate Bill 18; • A map that includes all cultural resources identified in all phases of survey and from the records search; and • A table composed of all cultural resources with the following information: site number(s), site description, landownership, in/out of APE, date recorded, eligibility, impacted/avoided. Anthony Madrigal, Jr., the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians, responded in a letter dated September 18, 2017. He stated that the Tribal Historic Preservation Office is not aware of any additional cultural or archaeological sites that pertain to the Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians within the Project area. However, the Project is adjacent to the Chemehuevi Traditional Use Area and in the summary of the previous surveys of cultural resources that the City provided to the Tribe, archaeological resources have been identified within or adjacent to the Project. On behalf of the Tribe, Mr. Madrigal requested the following during consultation: • Copies of all available cultural reports related to the Project. Mr. Madrigal stated that receipt of the requested materials does not constitute consultation and the Tribe may have recommendations or require further mitigation measures based on information contained in the requested materials. The City provided the cultural reports to the Tribe and no further correspondence was received from the Tribe. The City of La Quinta initiated an updated AB 52 consultation period in 2020. The City sent a letter to Native American Tribes suggested by the NAHC on March 3, 2020. The City did not receive comments from the Tribes during the 30-day comment period. Although responses were not received, the Applicant requested a meeting with the ACBCI to discuss the Tribe's past participation. Meetings were held on July 21, 30, and August 13, 2020 with the ACBCI to discuss the Project and necessary mitigation measures. On August 11, 2020, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians (TMDCI) called the City to inquire about projects within the City. The City notified the TMDCI of the Travertine Project and emailed the Tribe the cultural studies. TMDCI attended the meeting with the City and the ACBCI on September 3, 2020. Table 4.17-1, below, outlines the various meetings held by the City with the ACBCI and the TMDCI. Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-11 October 2023 701 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Table 4.17-1 Tribal Consultation 2020 Meeting Date Tribe Discussed July 21, 2020 ACBCI Introduced Project and reviewed location of sensitive sites. Discussed Martinez Mountain Rockslide District, villages July 30, 2020 ACBCI located near there, trails map, interpretive exhibits, etc. Discussed the geology in the area, geomorphology to find August 13, 2020 ACBCI depth of hard rock and determine potential resources. September 3, 2020 ACBCITMDCI Project discussed with both Tribes in attendance. Applicant explained Project, monitoring protocol was September 22, 2020 TMDCI discussed. ACBCI Suggestions for mitigation measures were provided. Both September 28, 2020 Tribes understood the Project and were satisfied with the TMDCI consultation process. The TMDCI provided feedback on resource protection measures in a meeting between the Project applicant, the City, and SWCA on September 22, 2020. This included a request for monitors to be present for both excavation and for observing areas where the excavated soils will be used as fill to ensure that no artifacts are inadvertently transferred to new portions of the Project area. The TMDCI indicated that excavations over 10 feet deep would not need to be monitored and that the two interested Tribes could work together to provide monitors as needed (i.e., one monitor could represent both Tribes). However, after the meeting on September 28, 2020 the TMDCI did not provide a written letter with recommendations, as requested by the City. Communication from the Tribe stopped although the City made multiple attempts to follow-up with the TMDCI. In a letter dated September 28, 2020, the ACBCI thanked the City in their efforts to include the THPO and stated that the concerns of the Tribe THPO were addressed and proper mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure the protection of Tribal cultural resources. The letter concluded the AB 52 consultation efforts. However, the THPO requested the following: • An Avoidance Mitigation Plan developed in consultation with the Tribes. This plan shall address process and procedures for avoiding and mitigating impacts to cultural resources and historic properties; • The City require fencing with a buffer placed around resources to be avoided; • The City assign a Compliance Officer to ensure mitigation measures are in place and followed during the duration of the Project with a monthly report on compliance; and • The City require Cultural Sensitivity Training for all construction crew members. Although no Tribal cultural resources were identified within the development portion of the Project property during AB 52 consultation, Mitigation Measure CR-7 requires that the Project applicant hire an approved Native American Monitor during certain ground disturbing activities. The Project site would be initially subject to grubbing and grading, in which the Project applicant would be responsible for hiring a Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-12 October 2023 702 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Native American Monitor during grading activities to depths of 10 feet. The Project applicant shall also be required to retain a qualified archaeologist (Mitigation Measure CR-1). The archaeologist shall provide cultural sensitivity training (Mitigation Measure CR-6) and prepare a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Mitigation Measure CR-3). Additionally, prior to ground disturbance, an archaeological monitor, working under the supervision of the qualified archaeologist, and Native American monitors from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and/or the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, shall be retained to monitor certain ground - disturbing activities (Mitigation Measure CR-7). If Tribal cultural resources are encountered, additional consultation with California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)-listed Tribal groups should be conducted immediately (Mitigation Measure CR-8). A compliance officer shall also be retained to ensure mitigation measures are in place and followed for the duration of the Project (Mitigation Measure CR-2). With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, CR-3, CR-6, CR-7, and CR- 8, impacts will be reduced to less than significant. Off -Site Utility Field As previously stated, the specific location of the off -site utilities has not yet been determined but a field of prospective well and substation development has been delineated. Continued outreach to local Tribes to determine if Tribal cultural resources may be impacted shall be required once the prospective off -site utility sites are determined. This is required by Mitigation Measure CR-4 and CR-7. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-4 and CR-7 well and substation development within the off - site utility field impacts to Tribal cultural resources will be reduced to less than significant levels. 4.17.5 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts relating to Tribal cultural resources are regional in nature, due to the wide distribution of native peoples in the Coachella Valley. Buildout of the Project area, including off -site utility sites, has the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impact on Tribal cultural resources. Development within the Project site with implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, CR-3, CR- 6, CR-7, and CR-8, will ensure that impacts to Tribal resources are less than significant. Development of other projects within the City and surrounding area would also be subject to the same standard requirements, mitigation measures (as applicable), and compliance with federal and State law as the proposed Project. Although continued development has the potential to cumulatively impact these resources, the continued application of City policies, General Plan policies and programs, federal and State law all will assure that cumulative impacts associated with Tribal cultural resources will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-13 October 2023 703 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.17.E Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures from Section 4.5, Cultural Resources (4.5.6, Mitigation Measures), also apply to reducing potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources: CR-1 Prior to any ground -disturbing activities, the Project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of Interior's Standards for professional archaeology, to carry out all mitigation measures related to cultural resources. Tribal monitoring of site disturbance will also be accommodated. CR-2 The Project applicant shall assign a compliance officer for the Project to ensure mitigation measures are in place and followed for the duration of Project construction. The compliance officer should prepare a monthly compliance report for distribution to the City, BOR, BLM, and interested Native American groups. The compliance officer may be the same person as the Project archaeologist or may be another qualified individual designated by the Project applicant. CR-3 Prior to the commencement of ground disturbance, a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Monitoring Plan) shall be prepared. The Monitoring Plan shall include, but not be limited to: principles and procedures for the identification of cultural resources monitoring protocols consistent with CR-1, CR-2, and CR-7 for ground -disturbing activities, a worker training program consistent with CR-6, and discovery and processing protocols for inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources consistent with CR-7 and CR-8. The plan shall detail protocols for determining circumstances in which additional or reduced levels of monitoring (e.g., spot checking) may be appropriate. Fencing with a buffer shall be placed around resources to be avoided. The Monitoring Plan shall also establish a protocol for communicating with the lead agencies and interested Native American parties. CR-4 Prior to ground -disturbing activities in any areas outside the APE described in the Project EIR, Exhibit 4.5-1, including but not limited to locations proposed for an off -site utility area, a supplemental study including an updated records search at the EIC, updated Sacred Lands File search, and pedestrian survey, shall be conducted. If resources are identified and cannot be avoided, they shall be assessed for their eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR. Avoidance and minimization measures identified as a result of the study shall be incorporated into the Monitoring Plan. CR-5 In the event of unanticipated discovery of NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources within the APE or the off -site utility field, where operationally feasible, such resources shall be protected from direct Project impacts by Project redesign (i.e., relocation of the ground disturbance, ancillary facilities, or temporary facilities or work areas). Avoidance mechanisms shall include temporary fencing and designation of such areas as environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-14 October 2023 704 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES for the duration of the proposed Project. ESAs shall include the boundary of each historic property plus a 30-m (98-foot) buffer around the resource. CR-6 Prior to the commencement of ground -disturbing activities, typically at the Project kick-off, the qualified archaeologist or their designee will provide cultural sensitivity training to construction crews. The training will provide information on signs of potential cultural resources, regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural resources and the proper procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources discoveries be made during construction. Workers will be provided contact information and protocols to follow if inadvertent discoveries are made. Workers will be shown examples of the types of Tribal cultural resources that might be encountered and that would require notification of the Project archaeologist. The Project archaeologist shall create a training video, PowerPoint presentation, or printed literature that can be shown to new workers and contractors to avoid continuous training throughout the life of the Project. CR-7 Prior to ground disturbance, an archaeological monitor, working under the supervision of the qualified archaeologist, and Native American monitors from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, shall be retained to monitor ground -disturbing activities. Monitoring will take place within or near ESAs or in other areas agreed upon by the archaeologist, City, and Native American monitor, and as identified in the Monitoring Plan. Monitoring activities will include examining the excavation of native soils as well as the disposal of spoils in certain areas. The duration, timing and location of the monitoring shall be determined by the City in consultation with the qualified archaeologist and Native American monitors as outlined in the Monitoring Plan. Should buried cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer. Additionally, fencing with a buffer shall be required around resources to be avoided. CR-8 In the event that cultural resources are exposed during excavation, work in the immediate vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the find. Ground -disturbing activities may continue in other areas. For discoveries located outside of BLM land, if the City determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis by the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is a protected resource under CEQA (Section 15064.5f; PRC 21082) additional work such as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of ground -disturbing activity in the location of discovery. For discoveries located on BLM-land, if the BLM determines, in consideration of the subsequent analysis of the qualified archaeologist, that the resource is protected under Section 106 of the NHPA, additional work such as testing or data recovery may be warranted prior to resumption of Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-15 October 2023 705 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ground -disturbing activity in the location of discovery. Should any Tribal cultural resources be encountered, additional consultation with California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)—listed Tribal groups should be conducted in coordination with the City and/or with the BLM and BOR if the discovery occurs on federal lands. CR-9 If human remains are encountered, pursuant to State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. Additional procedures for responding to the unanticipated discovery of human remains are outlined below. Modern Remains If the Coroner's Office determines the remains are of modern origin, the appropriate law enforcement officials will be called by the Coroner and conduct the required procedures. Work will not resume until law enforcement has released the area. Archaeological Remains If the remains are determined to be archaeological in origin, the appropriate protocol is determined by whether the discovery site is located on federally or non -federally owned or managed lands. Remains Discovered on Federally Owned or Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined that the remains are archaeological or historic in age, the appropriate BLM Palm Springs Field Office or BOR archaeologist must be called. The archaeologist will initiate the proper procedures under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). If the remains can be determined to be Native American, the steps as outlined in NAGPRA, 43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 10.6 Inadvertent discoveries, must be followed. Resumption of Activity: The activity that resulted in the discovery of human remains on federal lands may resume after a written, binding agreement is executed between the BLM or BOR and federally recognized affiliated Indian Tribe(s) that adopts a recovery plan for the excavation or removal of the human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony following 43 CFR Section 10.3(b)(1) of these regulations. The disposition of all human remains and NAGPRA items shall be carried out following 43 CFR 10.6. Remains Discovered on Non -Federally Owned/Managed Lands After the Coroner has determined the remains on non -federally owned or managed lands are archaeological, the Coroner will make recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the remains to the person responsible for the excavation or discovery, or to his or her authorized representative. If the Coroner believes the remains to be those of a Native Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-16 October 2023 706 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES American, he/she shall contact the California NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. The NAHC will notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendant (MILD) of the remains. The MILD has 48 hours after accessing the site of the discovery to make recommendations to the landowner for treatment or disposition of the human remains. If the MILD does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the landowner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. If the landowner does not accept the descendant's recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the NAHC. 4.17.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation The implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-9 will ensure that impacts to Tribal cultural resources are reduced to less than significant levels. 4.17.8 References 1. Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, December 2017. 2. Addendum to Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Land Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. Travertine Draft EIR 4.17-17 October 2023 707 Page intentionally blank 708 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems 4.18.1 Introduction This section of the Draft EIR addresses the Project environmental setting for purposes of utilities and service system, identifies both the applicable thresholds of significance and the Project's potentially significant utilities and service system impacts, and identifies mitigation measures capable of reducing any potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, Travertine Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) (Appendix N.1 and N.2), the Travertine Drainage Master Plan (Appendix J.3), and Chapter V, Public Infrastructure and Services, from the La Quinta General Plan, as well as public documents published by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). 4.18.2 Existing Conditions The Project property occupies approximately 855 acres in the southern portion of La Quinta. The majority of the Project property is undeveloped, lying on broad gently sloping alluvial fans, with shrubs, boulders, and rocks scattered throughout the site. Approximately 220 acres of the Project property was previously developed and operated as a vineyard, occupying a central portion of the property. The vineyard has been abandoned since 2007. The properties surrounding the Project are vacant and undeveloped. CVWD groundwater recharge basins and the Dike 4 flood control levee are located to the immediate east. The Project will develop an off -site utility field which will include water wells and an electric power substation to support the proposed Project. The exact locations of the off -site improvements have not been determined; however, they are proposed to be located east and within a two-mile radius of the Project site. Currently, the off -site locations are primarily characterized by vacant, undeveloped land and agricultural land. Domestic Water Service CVWD is the Public Water Supplier that provides water services to the City of La Quinta. Established in 1918 under the County Water District Act provisions of the California Water Code, CVWD provides water related services for domestic water, wastewater collection and treatment, recycled water, agricultural irrigation water, drainage management, imported water supply, groundwater replenishment, stormwater management, and flood control and water conservation. Domestic water is provided to the Coachella Valley by groundwater. Groundwater is the water found underground in the voids in soil, sand, and rock. It is stored in and moves slowly through aquifers. Groundwater supplies are replenished, or recharged, by precipitation that seeps into the land's surface. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-1 October 2023 709 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS In the Coachella Valley, groundwater is also recharged by imported Colorado River water. The Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (also known as the Whitewater River Subbasin and the Upper and Lower Thermal Subbasin) has been the principal source of water for the valley since the early 1900s. This basin has an estimated storage capacity of 39.2 million acre-feet (AF) of water within the upper 1,000 feet and is divided into four subbasins: Indio, Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, and San Gorgonio. The Project site is specifically underlain by the Indio Subbasin, which is estimated to have approximately 29.8 million AF of water in the first 1,000 feet below ground surface, and approximately 76 percent of the total groundwater in the Coachella Valley groundwater basin. CVWD works with other local water agencies and Coachella Valley stakeholders to implement water conservation, water reuse, and groundwater recharge strategy to ensure water availability and system capacity to meet the growing needs of the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley is bordered on the west and north by high mountains, which provide an effective barrier against coastal storms, and which greatly reduce the contribution of direct precipitation to recharge of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. The majority of natural recharge comes from runoff from the adjacent mountains. Artificial replenishment, or recharge, is recognized by the water districts as one of the most effective methods available for preserving local groundwater supplies, reversing aquifer overdraft and meeting demand by domestic consumers. CVWD's groundwater replenishment strategy involves the operation and maintenance of three replenishment facilities serving the Indio Subbasin: Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility, the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, and the Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility. The Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility is located east of the Project. This facility uses imported Colorado River water to recharge the lower valley aquifer. CVWD currently has approximately 110,899 active domestic water connections and provided approximately 88,911 AF of potable water in 2020. Existing domestic water infrastructure proximate to the proposed Project property extends to the Madison Street and Avenue 60 intersection (approximately 0.50 miles north of the Project), and along Monroe Street at the Avenue 62 intersection (approximately 0.75 miles east of the Project). CVWD operates more than 97 active wells and serves a population of 300,000 in its service area. CVWD's 2020 Regional Urban Water Management Plan has been developed to assist the agency in reliably meeting current and future water demands in a cost-effective manner. Wastewater that has been treated and disinfected can be reused for landscape irrigation and other purposes. Recycled wastewater has been used for irrigation of golf courses and municipal landscaping in the Coachella Valley since the 1960s. As growth occurs in the eastern Coachella Valley, the supply of recycled water is expected to increase, creating an additional opportunity to maximize local water supply. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-2 October 2023 710 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater Service System CVWD provides the City with wastewater collection and treatment. Most of the City and Sphere of Influence (SOI) are served by the wastewater system, although some septic systems are still in use, particularly in the SOI area. CVWD treats nearly 17 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater from approximately 95,000 user accounts. CVWD operates five water reclamation plants and maintains more than 1,100 miles of sewer pipeline and more than 30 lift stations that transport wastewater to the nearest treatment facility. CVWD operates five water reclamation plants (WRPs), two of them (WRP- 7 and WRP-10) generate recycled water for irrigation of golf courses and large landscaped areas. Sewage generated north of Miles Avenue, in the northern part of the City, is conveyed to Wastewater Reclamation Plant 7 (WRP-7), located at Madison Street and Avenue 38. The capacity of WRP-7 is five mgd. For all land in the City and Sphere located south of Miles Avenue, sewage is treated at the Mid - Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located southeast of the City, which has a capacity to treat 9.5 mgd. WRP-4 became operational in 1986 and serves the communities from La Quinta to Mecca. WRP- 4 effluent is not currently recycled; however, it will be in the future when the demand for recycled water develops, and tertiary treatment is constructed. The other two WRPs serve isolated communities near the Salton Sea. A sixth WRP (WRP-9) was decommissioned in July 2015. Currently, the Project is not served by wastewater systems due to its undeveloped condition. However, the closest collector to the Project site is located at Monroe Street and Avenue 62. The Project will extend the existing sewer lines at this location via Avenue 62. The Project's connection to the existing sewer facility is discussed in greater detail below. Storm water The Project site is located on a bajada extending eastward from the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains toward the Eastern Coachella Valley floor. The site is isolated from the Valley's regional drainage patterns by the BOR Dike No. 4 levee, and the associated stormwater impound located immediately east of the proposed Project. The hydrologic setting of the Project is also defined by the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains and various associated canyon drainages (Devil Canyon and unnamed smaller drainages) west of the Project site. Immediately north of the Project site is the existing Guadalupe Channel, which diverts and conveys canyon drainage into the Dike No. 4 impound. Some Project - affecting hillside runoff is also associated with a small portion of the Coral Mountain on the north end of the Project. To the east and intervening between the Project site and the Dike No. 4 impound is the Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility which uses imported Colorado River water to recharge the lower valley aquifer. The Project setting can also be described as the lower extent of the watershed area tributary to Dike No. 4 Drainage from various canyons on the easterly front of the Santa Rosa Mountains occur along distributary flow paths and active alluvial fan conveyances to the engineered retention area on the west side of Dike No. 4. The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes, located off -site on the northern end of the Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-3 October 2023 711 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Project, are also designed to convey flows to Dike No. 4. The CVWD groundwater percolation ponds are presently protected from off -site drainage by a combination of earthen berms, rock lining, and concrete channelization. Solid Waste Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (RCDWR) is responsible for the efficient and effective landfilling of non -hazardous county waste. In this effort the Department operates five landfills and has a contract agreement for waste disposal with an additional private landfill; it also administers several transfer station leases. Solid waste collection, disposal and recycling services for the City of La Quinta are provided by Burrtec. This provider offers its customers a wide range of services for residential to commercial businesses, construction -related activities and special events. Solid waste and recycling collected from the proposed project will initially be hauled to the Edom Hill Transfer Station. This transfer station is permitted to receive 3,500 tons per day (tpd). Residual waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility outside of the Coachella Valley. These include Badlands Landfill, and the Lamb Canyon Landfill. Additional information on each landfill is provided below: • Lamb Canyon Landfill is located between the City of Beaumont and City of San Jacinto at 16411 Lamb Canyon Road (State Route 79), south of Interstate 10 and north of Highway 74. The landfill is owned and operated by Riverside County. The landfill property encompasses approximately 1,189 acres, of which 703.4 acres encompass the current landfill permit area. Of the 703.4-acre landfill permit area, approximately 144.6 acres are permitted for waste disposal. The landfill is currently permitted to receive 5,000 tpd of solid waste for disposal and 500 tpd for beneficial reuse. The site has an estimated total disposal capacity of approximately 20.7 million tons as of January 1, 2022, the landfill has a total remaining capacity of approximately 19,242,950 cubic yards. The current landfill remaining disposal capacity is estimated to last, at a minimum, until approximately 2029. Landfill expansion potential exists at the Lamb Canyon Landfill site. • Badlands Landfill is located northeast of the City of Moreno Valley at 31125 Ironwood Avenue and accessed from State Highway 60 at Theodore Avenue. The landfill is owned and operated by Riverside County. The existing landfill encompasses 1,168.3 acres, with a total permitted disturbance area of 278 acres, of which 150 acres are permitted for refuse disposal. The landfill is currently permitted to receive 4,500 tpd of solid waste for disposal and 300 tpd for beneficial reuse. The site has an estimated total capacity of approximately 20.5 million tons. As of January 1, 2022, the landfill had a total remaining disposal capacity of approximately 7,800,000 cubic yards. Landfill expansion potential exists at the Badlands Landfill site. • El Sobrante Landfill is located in the City of Corona at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road. This landfill is privately owned and operated by USA Waste Services of California, Inc. and the County of Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-4 October 2023 712 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Riverside Community Health Agency is the local enforcement Agency for this landfill. The El Sobrante Landfill has a maximum total permitted disposal of 16,054 tons per day and a maximum permitted capacity of 209,910,000 cubic yards. As of 2018, the landfill has a remaining capacity of 143,977,170 cubic yards. As part of its long-range planning and management activities, the RCDWR ensures that Riverside County has a minimum of 15 years of capacity, at any time, for future landfill disposal. The 15-year projection of disposal capacity is prepared each year as part of the annual reporting requirements for the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. Currently, the Project does not generate solid waste due to its vacant and undeveloped condition. Electricity In La Quinta, electric power service is provided by Imperial Irrigation District (IID), a local taxing district which provides electric power to the eastern Coachella Valley and Imperial County. IID generates over 60 percent of its power from a number of facilities, including the Coachella Gas Turbine facility in Coachella, and its transmission facilities, including its Green Path system, which transmits geothermal energy produced in Imperial County. IID also procures renewable energy from diverse sources including biomass, biowaste, hydroelectric, solar, and wind. The Project site is not currently served by electricity, due to its vacant and undeveloped condition. Electric utilities for the site will be provided by IID. The closest substation to the Project is located at the IID La Quinta Headquarters at 81600 Avenue 58, approximately 1.40 miles northeast of the Project property. Existing distribution power poles are located on Avenue 62 and extend approximately 0.64 miles onto the Project property. The power poles continue along Avenue 62 to the Monroe intersection where the above -ground poles extend one -mile north to the Avenue 60 intersection. In order to obtain electricity service from IID, it is anticipated that the Project will be required to contribute to the construction of an off -site substation which will serve the substation's regional limits and the Project. Natural Gas Natural gas is provided to the City of La Quinta and will be extended to the Project site by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). SoCalGas is the principal distributor of natural gas in Southern California, serving residential, commercial, and industrial markets. SoCalGas has 21.4 million customers in more than 500 communities encompassing approximately 20,000 square miles throughout Central and Southern California, from the City of Visalia to the US -Mexico border. High-pressure distribution lines are located approximately 3.30 miles north of the Project at the Madison Street and Avenue 54 intersection. Natural gas lines are also located on Avenue 62 and on Avenue 58. Currently, natural gas is not provided to the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-5 October 2023 713 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Telecommunications As telephone service has become deregulated and technology has improved, a number of communication alternatives have become available to the public, including cellular, internet, fiber optic, and cable -based services. As the City of La Quinta continues to develop, it is expected that a number of new technologies will become available to assure adequate and effective communication and data transfer for the City's residents and businesses. The Project is not currently served by telecommunication facilities, but the Project is located within the service areas of Frontier and Charter Communications. Existing telecommunication lines are located along Madison Street, south of Avenue 60. Surrounding properties, including Trilogy, La Quinta, are served by telecommunications. 4.18.3 Regulatory Setting Federal Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was originally passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation's public drinking water supply. SDWA authorizes the EPA to set national health - based standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally occurring and man-made contaminants that may be found in drinking water. The U.S. EPA, states, and water systems then work together to make sure that these standards are met (EPA 2020). Not all local groundwater supplies in the region are safe for consumption without treatment owning to the occurrence of such natural and manmade contaminants as arsenic and perchlorate. The local water purveyor (CVWD) is responsible for ensuring that all domestic water supplies are in accordance with the SDWA. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) RCRA was enacted in 1976 and is the principal federal law in the United States governing the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste. The U.S. EPA oversees waste management regulation pursuant to Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Under RCRA, however, states are authorized to carry out many of the functions of the federal law through their own hazardous waste programs and laws, as long as they are at least as stringent (or more so) than the federal regulations. Thus, CalRecycle manages the State of California's solid waste and hazardous materials programs pursuant to U.S. EPA approval. State Senate Bill 610 Senate Bill 610 (SB 610), which was enacted in 2001 and became effective January 1, 2002. SB 610 amended Section 211S1.9 of the Public Resources Code. It requires cities and counties and other CEQA Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-6 October 2023 714 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS lead agencies to request specific information on water supplies from the Public Water System (PWS) that would serve any project that is subject to CEQA and is defined as a "Project" in Water Code Section 10912. This information is to be incorporated into the environmental review documents prepared pursuant to CEQA. Specifically, SB 610 requires the PWS or the CEQA lead agency, where a PWS is not available, to prepare a Water Supply Assessment for any project that consists of one or more characteristics specified in SB 610, which this Project satisfies as it is a residential development of more than 500 units. The Travertine WSA can be found in Appendix N.1 and N.2 of this Draft EIR. Urban Water Management Plan The Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) requires that water suppliers providing water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers, or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually, prepare and submit an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. The UWMP assists water districts in their effort to regulate the provision of water to individual projects by identifying and defining applicable Demand Management Measures (DMMs). DMMs include Water Waste Prevention Ordinances, Metering, Conservation Pricing, and Public Education and Outreach. UWMPs are required to support the water suppliers' long-term resource planning to ensure that adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water needs. UWMPs must assess the reliability of water sources over a 20-year planning horizon during normal, single -dry, and multiple -dry years, describe management measures and water shortage contingency plans, report progress toward meeting conservation goals and targeted reduction in per -capita urban water consumption, and discuss the uses and planned uses of recycled water (CVWD 2020). CalRecycle The State of California uses for its Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), formerly known as the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB), performs a variety of regulatory functions pursuant to California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 27 and other regulations, according to the County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 4.17-44 Public Review Draft § February 2015. Among other things, CalRecycle set minimum standards for the handling and disposal of solid waste designed to protect public health and safety, as well as the environment. It is also the lead agency for implementing the State of California municipal solid waste program deemed adequate by the US EPA for compliance with RCRA (Riv. County EIR No. 521). The CalRecycle Enforcement Agency (EA) is required to inspect and enforce state minimum standards, solid waste facility permit terms and conditions, and the administration of solid waste facilities permits and their operating documents. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-7 October 2023 715 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS California Integrated Waste Management Act (IWMA) Assembly Bill (AB) 939 AB 939 was passed by the State Legislature in 1989 to reduce dependence on landfills for the disposal of solid waste and to ensure an effective and coordinated system for the safe management of all solid waste generated within California. AB 939 required all California cities, counties, and approved regional solid waste management agencies responsible for enacting plans and implementing programs to divert 25 percent of their solid waste by 1995 and 50 percent by year 2000. It also required local governments to prepare and implement plans to improve waste resource management by integrating management principles that place importance on first reducing solid waste through source reduction, reuse, recycling and composting before disposal at environmentally safe landfills or via transformation (e.g., regulated incineration of solid waste materials). These plans must also be updated every five years (CalRecycle and Riv. County EIR No. 521). Mandatory Diversion and Recycling, AB 341 Approved in 2011, this act amended the California Public Resources Code (Section 42649 et seq.) to address solid waste diversion (i.e., recycling) targets to decrease the amount of waste going to landfills and thus extend their usable lives. AB 341 requires cities and counties, including La Quinta and Riverside County, to include source reduction, recycling and composting in their integrated waste management plans (IWMP). In addition, under AB 341 counties were required to "divert 50% of all solid waste from landfill disposal or transformation [e.g., incineration] by January 1, 2000, through source reduction, recycling and composting activities." By 2020, the target rises to "not less than 75% of solid waste." The RCDWR is responsible for implementing AB 341 in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County (Riv. County EIR No. 521). Regional and Local Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan The 2020 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) has been prepared on behalf of the six urban water suppliers that serve customers in the Coachella Valley: • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Coachella Water Authority (CWA) • Desert Water Agency (DWA) • Indio Water Authority (IWA) • Mission Springs Water District (MSWD) • Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company (MDMWC) These agencies have historically collaborated on planning efforts related to water resources and their efficient use in the Coachella Valley. The purpose of this RUWMP is to allow the six agencies to address Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) requirements. Although most agencies prepare an individual Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-8 October 2023 716 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS UWMP and submit it to DWR, the California Water Code allows agencies to join together to prepare a RUWMP. The RUWMP must include all the same elements as an individual UWMP. Jointly preparing a RUWMP presents an opportunity for agencies to coordinate their efforts on demand projections, characterization of shared supplies, and planning for potential water shortages. The RUWMP analyzes the potential sources of water supply, including: their probable yields; the probable urban water demand, given reasonable assumptions; the comparability of the supply and demand figures; and the water supplies under a range of hydrologic conditions. These are addressed in the RUWMP by the identification of feasible and cost-effective opportunities to meet existing and future demands. CVWD Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 1302.4 CVWD Landscape Ordinance 1302.4 required a series of reduction methods, including requirements that new developments install weather -based irrigation controllers that automatically adjust water allocation. Additional requirements included setbacks of spray emitters from impervious surfaces, as well as use of porous rock and gravel buffers between grass and curbs to eliminate run-off onto streets. With the exception of turf, all landscaping, including groundcover and shrubbery, must be irrigated with a drip system. Also, the maximum water allowance for landscaped areas throughout the CVWD service area has been reduced by programming that requires developers to maximize the use of native and other drought -tolerant landscape materials and minimize use of more water -intensive landscape features, including turf and fountains. The City of La Quinta has adopted by reference this landscape ordinance. City of La Quinta Municipal Code The City of La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) establishes guidelines and requirements regulating water use, runoff, and drainage within the City. LQMC Chapter 8.13, Water Efficient Landscaping, implements the requirements of the California Code of Regulations Title 23, Waters Division 2, Department of Water Resources Chapter 2.7, Model Efficient Landscaping Ordinance, and State of California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act. Chapter 8.13 establishes effective water efficient landscape requirements for newly installed and rehabilitated landscapes, in order to promote water conservation through climate appropriate plant material and efficient irrigation. Chapter 8.70, Surface Water Management and Discharge Controls, of the LQMC prohibits non-stormwater discharges into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), in order to reduce pollutants in urban runoff. Finally, Chapter 13.24.120, Drainage, sets forth the design parameters for establishing stormwater management for subdivisions, noting that the hydrologic and hydraulic design of drainage facilities shall be based on the storm event having a frequency of occurrence once every 100 years, also referred to as the controlling 100-year storm event. 4.18.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-9 October 2023 717 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The following standards and criteria for establishing significance of potential impacts related to utilities and service system were derived from the CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. Development of the proposed project would have a significant effect to if it is determined that the project would: a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, or wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b. Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Methodology A quantitative comparison was used to determine impacts of the Project on public utilities and service systems considering the available capacity and service area of existing infrastructure and services. The Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) and Drainage Master Plan for the Travertine development were consulted to determine Project -related water use and stormwater facilities, respectively. Analysis and findings of the Project -specific WSA/WSV and Drainage Master Plan are provided in the discussions below. Project Impact a. Requires or results in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects Water Infrastructure Currently, domestic water lines exist in the intersection of Avenue 60/Madison Street and the intersection of Avenue 62/Monroe Street. The existing line at Monroe Street and Avenue 62 is 24 inches, and the line at Madison and Avenue 60 is 30 inches. During Construction Phase 1, water lines will be Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-10 October 2023 718 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS extended into the Project to support construction activities. The proposed water system for the site would consist of a 12-inch water line connecting to the existing Avenue 60/Madison Street and Monroe Street/Avenue 62 water lines. The 12-inch water lines will connect to the existing infrastructure and travel south under Madison Street EVA extension, and west under Avenue 62. Twelve -inch and smaller lines will be installed throughout the Project property creating a network to serve the individual developments. Precise locations, alignments, and sizes of water service facilities will be determined at the Tentative and Final Map stage of development, per City and CVWD regulations and standards. Once the Project site is connected to the existing water lines, the Project's domestic water demand would be accommodated by CVWD. The Project will be connected to and served by CVWD's water distribution system. In addition to the Project's connection to the existing CVWD water lines, the Project will construct two CVWD water tanks and booster stations to store water at elevations necessary for the prescribed pressure zones. The water tanks are proposed to be located in the southwest property corner in order to provide the site with adequate domestic water and water pressure. The two water tanks with a storage capacity of 600,000 gallons and 2,650,000 gallons, identified as the "upper" and "lower" tanks (respectively). These water reservoirs and associated booster stations are proposed to convey well water and store it at elevations that provide required water pressure to service the site. The upper tank would be located at an elevation of 425 feet, while the lower tank would be located at an elevation of 335 feet. The water reservoir locations, including related facilities (service roadway, underground pipelines, etc.) are subject to review and approval by the USFWS, CVWD, and the CVCC. Both water tanks proposed onsite will be designed and developed in compliance with CVWD's Development Design Manual and included in Phase A Grading stage (grading of the southern portion of the site) and operable prior to lumber drop. Precise locations, alignments, and sizes of water service facilities will be determined at the Tentative and Final Map stage of development, per City and CVWD regulations and standards. The infrastructure and design components for the Project will be consistent with CVWD requirements and the UWMP. The Project will be further reviewed by City and CVWD staff to ensure compliance with all current and applicable water requirements. During Phase A Grading stage, the Project must also have the necessary fire flows to all hydrants in addition to providing two points of access. The Project will provide all wet and dry utilities from Avenue 62 to the point of connection for various builder phases. The Project will have to adequately secure all common area landscape prior to construction. Exhibit 4.18-1, Conceptual Water Plan, identifies the conceptual on -site water service facilities that are required to provide domestic water service to the community. These improvements discussed above would not result in a significant affect to CVWD water facilities, and once connected to the CVWD water lines, CVWD will have sufficient water to accommodate the proposed Project. Extension of water lines will have less than significant impacts on expanded water Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-11 October 2023 719 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS services because the physical expansion will occur within the existing disturbed areas of Madison Street and Avenue 62. Onsite expansion will not result in significant environmental affects to CVWD's water infrastructure because they will be developed in compliance with CVWD's existing standards. The onsite water infrastructure proposed for the Project would not result in environmental impacts to biological resources or air quality. As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Project buildout would exceed the applicable SCAQMD regional threshold for operational -source activity for emissions of VOCs. The nature of VOC emissions from the Project will not occur in a concentrated manner from a given point source facility, but rather as a combined total from dispersed land use and mobile emissions attributed to the dwelling units, resort, and golf facilities. The majority of VOC emissions are derived from consumer products (i.e., cleaning supplies, aerosols, etc.) and mobile sources (i.e., traffic -related). Periodic maintenance of the onsite infrastructure would require CVWD staff to drive to and from the site during operation, however, this would not occur on a daily basis and would only require one or two CVWD trucks (depending on the maintenance service). Therefore, the onsite water infrastructure would not result in increased mobile traffic and the exceedance of VOC emissions during operation. Additionally, as stated in Section 4.3, all construction activities will be subject to the City's fugitive dust control standards, which ensures that Localized Significance Threshold (LST) impacts associated with particulate matter will be less than significant. Thus, the construction and operation of the onsite water infrastructure would not result in impacts to air quality. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, the majority of the Project footprint is located outside of the adjacent CVMSHCP Conservation Area. However, approximately 36.89 acres of the Project footprint are within the Conservation Area, including 15.65 acres associated with the proposed water tank facility (6.40 acres of permanent impacts and 9.25 acres of remedial grading). As stated in Section 4.4, the impacts subject to the Joint Project Review (JPR) involve the construction of two water tanks and associated infrastructure resulting in disturbance of the acreage within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain Conservation Area. The JPR concluded that the total 6.5 acres of disturbance will not significantly impact the conservation objectives of the CVMSHCP. The JPR found the Project as proposed is consistent with the CVMSHCP if conditioned to implement the required Avoidance and Minimization Measures and applicable Land Use Adjacency guidelines as described in the CVMSHCP Plan documents (see Section 4.4 for further analysis and mitigation measures). CVWD requires the construction of up to five wells and associated improvements at the off -site utility field at buildout of the Project. The number of well sites necessary to serve the Project has been determined in consultation with CVWD. The initial number of well sites based on the total acreage of the Project is equivalent to up to five well sites at maximum. The final number of well sites that will actually be needed to serve the site will be determined and incorporated into a development agreement between CVWD and the developer based on extenuating circumstances for providing alternative means and measures of water service to not only the Project property, but to the region. The process for acquisition of well sites will be done by a private purchase by the developer, where the environmental Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-12 October 2023 720 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS clearance coincident with the Project will be generic for all typical well sites located within CVWD's jurisdiction. The off -site well sites will be purchased by the developer and ultimately dedicated to CVWD. One off -site well will be constructed during the Grading Phase A stage within the identified utility field area north and east of the Project property. The developer must submit the location of the well sites to CVWD for approval. The well sites should be fully improved with exterior low -maintenance landscaping, 8-foot-high block walls, and a 20-foot-wide concrete driveway, access gates, curbs and gutters, 12-inch minimum diameter water pipeline stub which connects to the domestic water system, power and telephone service, and blow -off water drainage facilities. If the blow -off water will be retained within the site, then the minimum size of the site shall be 0.75 acres. If a retention basin is proposed outside the well site, then a minimum 0.50-acre site is acceptable; however, the maintenance of the pipeline to the retention basin and the retention basin itself, shall be the responsibility of the property owner. A civil site plan must be submitted for final approval prior to construction of the above requirements. The development of the five wells will provide water to future developments within CVWD's service area. All future wells developed on- and off -site would be consistent with the CVWD Development Design Manual (Chapter 5.6, Well Site and Well Pumping Plant Criteria). Construction impacts associated with the installation of the on -site and off -site connections are expected to be confined to trenching and related construction activities would be temporary and limited. All improvements related to water service will be coordinated in accordance with the City (if in La Quinta jurisdictional boundaries), Riverside County (if in unincorporated area), and CVWD standards which would preclude any interruptions in existing service of the surrounding properties. The Project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water treatment facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, impacts to the existing water infrastructure would be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-13 October 2023 721 \t—S 7 PR 0 ��O�SE JeF.FzRs0N STREf %~4 v —XI % NAP EAST 00— p- d p 3L err ■ "A L 21 d 12 AVENUE la2 • UF-- A15; � FN'SFc7 P -71 3F ZONE 42:5 ZONE ZIS LFGENC 1�c5 A I P. yd 14 * r W jLi i 5;n':'.p14jAlF WW�j lwjk�j Source: TRG Land, Inc. pi AVE 62 INSERT 91 AVEWE V EME] -F-wemodP.,r�wmrs Plim.n MSA C ON SU LTI N G. I N C-- CONCEPTUAL WATER PLAN I,' M E 14 Cl N F! P! ! d Q, -A 1. i. w'qFi 'A 4 f.. TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT4. -1 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater Wastewater Capacity CVWD has two wastewater treatment plants serving the City. For all land, including that of the proposed Project, in the City and Sphere located south of Miles Avenue, sewage is treated at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located on Avenue 62 and Filmore Street southeast of the City. This plant has capacity to treat 9.5 mgd. The average annual flow to this facility is approximately 4.75 mgd. The proposed Project property is estimated to generate wastewater at 261,200 gallons per day (gpd) or 0.27 mgd, which is 2.7 percent of the plant's capacity. Given the current surplus capacity of 4.75 million gallons per day, CVWD has indicated that new wastewater treatment facilities are not required as a result of the proposed development. Wastewater Infrastructure The closest wastewater infrastructure to the Project site is located at the Monroe Street and Avenue 62 intersection. The Project proposes to extend CVWD sewer mains west of this point of connection to the project site via 18-inch sewer mains. Similar to the water infrastructure, the 18-inch sewer lines will below located underground below the Avenue 62 roadway towards the project site. Twelve -inch and fl- inch lines will be installed throughout the project creating a network to serve the individual developments. Precise locations, alignments, and sizes of sewer service facilities will be determined at the Tentative and Final Map stage of development, per City and CVWD regulations and standards. Once the project site is connected to the existing sewer lines, the project's wastewater would be accommodated by the CVWD. The Project will be connected to and served by the CVWD's wastewater system. The conceptual on -site sewer facilities and improvements are shown on Exhibit 4.18-2, Conceptual Sewer Plan. The permanent impacts are 2.3 acres which include road, pad area for tanks, and walls. The temporary impact area is 4.1 acres and includes graded slope that are to be restored to native vegetation with locally harvested seed stock. The total impact is 6.4 acres within the conservation area. Overall, CVWD has sufficient treatment capacity to treat wastewater generated by the proposed Project, and the Project is not anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. The proposed Project's impact on wastewater treatment systems would be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-15 October 2023 723 PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET NAP LOOP STREET EAST 85) 811 851 LOOP STREET r 811 WEST 55 8 819 X;e 8" A 8% 8"' 811 811 A 899 Ll je Martinez Rock Slide N LEGEND Fl"W—%] Sewer Lines Source: TRG Land, Inc. 7-=— Q v Y'i —.- - AVENUE 62 M SA. -CON SU LTI N C, I NC- CONCEPTUAL SEWER AN Z' ir.,MG a - r%A F 14f'-1'4ff.F Pi1j4QP I.j�N r- RN 0.4 4 f.-. TRAVERTINE EXHIBIT f8-2 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Storm Water Drainage As discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project property's current hydrologic setting is defined by the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and the various associated canyon drainages (Devil Canyon and unnamed smaller drainages) west of the Project property; the Guadalupe Channel and the Coral Mountain formation north of the Project property; and the BOR Dike No. 4 Levee and associated stormwater impound (i.e., Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility) to the east. These natural and manmade features allow water to flow from the mountains and canyons easterly along distributary flow paths and active alluvial fan conveyances to the engineered retention area on the west side of Dike No. 4. The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes, located off -site on the northern end of the Project property, are also designed to convey flows to Dike No. 4. The CVWD groundwater percolation ponds are presently protected from off -site drainage by a combination of earthen berms, rock lining, and concrete channelization. In order to determine the existing drainage environment and design the flood control system for the proposed Project, a Project -specific Drainage Master Plan (DMP) was prepared by Q3 Consulting (March 2023) (Appendix J.3). The DMP outlines a detailed watershed assessment, including regional and local hydrology, flood hazard analysis, hydraulics and sedimentation for the Project site. The intended use of the DMP is to (1) identify flood hazards within and in the vicinity of the Travertine Specific Planning Area, (2) develop a regional approach to mitigate the flood hazards, (3) identify local drainage facility requirements, and (4) evaluate development -related impacts to existing facilities, including Dike No. 4, the Guadalupe Creed Diversion Dikes, and the CVWD deep aquifer recharge basins. The following discussion evaluates the off -site and on -site stormwater infrastructure proposed for the Project. Off -Site Drainage and Flood Management Consistent with the recommendations of the DMP, the Project will incorporate off -site flood protection measures including a combination of perimeter embankments, and drainage swales along the western and southern site development boundaries, and improvements to the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes on the north side. The proposed perimeter embankments would consist of grade differentials and swales along the western boundary (west edge protection to reorient the off -site unconfined alluvial flows from Devil's Canyon and Middle Canyon Area) that currently flow easterly across the Project property around the development and toward the north side of the Project property and into the existing Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes. Improvements to the Guadalupe Dike would convey the new flow rates (approximately a 5 percent increase from Project development) with freeboard and scour protection as required by CVWD, and in accordance with Federal standards for levee certification. The off -site runoff from the Middle Canyons, and Rock Avalanche Canyons would be intercepted along the southern development boundary by a perimeter embankment that will convey flows easterly along the southern development boundary to Dike No. 4. The conceptual drainage plan for the Travertine development ensures that all residents of the community, as well as downstream facilities and properties, will be Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-17 October 2023 725 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS protected from the local hydrologic conditions. See Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR for further discussion and analysis of the proposed off -site drainage facilities associated with the Project. To address off -site drainage conditions that interface with and currently pass through the Project site, the DMP proposes a flood protection system, which requires flood control barriers to direct off -site ephemeral drainage in a northerly and easterly direction, as it interfaces with the western and southern edges of the project, respectively. The Project's compliance with the DMP's conceptual design and layout of the proposed flood protection, as well as the requirements and criteria for the facility design is provided in PDF-HWQ-3 in Chapter 3.0, Project Description. The impacts and controls from the DMP are detailed in Chapter 3.0, and summarized below: Proposed West and South Bank Protection: The west and south banks are subject to active and inactive alluvial fan flows. The final design of these facilities will incorporate scour analysis to establish the appropriate toe -down protection. Accordingly, the proposed flood protection banks will take into account the natural erosion and deposition process inherent to the alluvial fan activity. The South Bank is subject to flows from the Middle Canyons and Rock Avalanche Canyon. The bank is proposed to be roughly parallel to the direction of flow and will be designed as a standard channel bank. The top of bank will provide a minimum of 3 feet of freeboard above the controlling 100-year storm event. An Operations and Maintenance (0&M) Plan will be developed and implemented for the west and south banks and include provisions to monitor and remove sediment along the west bank. The O&M Plan is required as Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 and includes provisions to monitor and remove sediment along the west bank to maintain pre -project conditions and will reduce off -site siltation and erosion impacts to below a level of significance. Existing Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes: The Guadalupe Dike was constructed in 1968 to handle total flow from the Devil Canyon watershed calculated at that time. The construction of the proposed Project will result in additional flow (approximately 5 percent) from the unnamed canyon being diverted north to the Guadalupe Dike. The impacts to the Dike from increased storm flows are generally located downstream forthe proposed Jefferson Street crossing, where the flow diversion occurs. The Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes downstream of the diversion are proposed to be improved as part of the project to convey the new flow rates with the freeboard and scour protection as required by CVWD, and in accordance with Federal standards for levee certification (PDF-HWQ-2), reducing erosion that could potentially occur at the Dike with the new development to less than significant levels. Proposed Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 Bridge Crossings: The Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 roadway extension into the Project property will require crossings of the Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dikes and Dike No. 4. The bridge configuration and sizing shall be determined during the final design and incorporated into the hydraulic models. The final design shall address freeboard and scour calculations to ascertain the proper engineering controls. Final design of the Avenue 62 crossing of the Dike shall be Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-18 October 2023 726 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS evaluated to ascertain the water surface profile along the Dike and water surface elevations pertaining to stability or seepage. This is required by PDF-HWQ-1. Existing Dike No. 4: The proposed Project will have little to no impact on the runoff volumes generated from the total watershed tributary to the Dike No. 4. The net bulked volume for the controlling 100-year storm event is effectively equal in the existing and Project conditions. As proposed, Project flow increments will not reach the Dike 4 impound. Rather, on -site runoff will be impounded on site and percolated into the ground. The Project will include the extension of Avenue 62 and Madison Street over Dike No. 4, and a minor re -direction of flow from the unnamed canyon to the Guadalupe Dikes. These Project elements will have a minor impact on the maximum flood stage profile along Dike No. 4. During the 24-hour, 100-year storm event, the maximum water surface depth increases from 15.18 to 15.53 feet, resulting in a minimum freeboard of 11.75 feet. The increased depth still provides for a minimum freeboard of 3.15 feet which far exceeds the prior one -foot criteria adopted by CVWD for the standard Project flood, and the controlling 100-year storm event freeboard on 11.75 feet also far exceeds to current standard of 4-feet. In this context, the term "exceedance" pertains to freeboard capacity, rather than an exceedance of capacity. Ownership and maintenance of the levees is a responsibility of CVWD. The engineer shall consult and, as necessary, secure approvals from CVWD, BLM, BOR, and any other responsible agency prior to preparation of the final design and technical studies. In summary, the proposed flood control improvements and PDF-HWQ-1 through PDF-HWQ-3 and Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 are designed to convey runoff around the Project while taking into consideration the natural erosion and deposition process associated with the active alluvial fan. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected. On -Site Drainage and Flood Management The Hydrology Report recommends a system of underground storm drains and catch basins to intercept, convey, and infiltrate stormwater runoff within the Project property to ensure equivalence between pre - and post -development conditions. Specifically, stormwater will be conveyed down the Project property gradient and into two primary surface basins (Basin A and Basin B) located at the east -end of the Project property. The on -site storm flow volume difference between the pre- and post- development conditions (32.6 ac-ft) will be retained and infiltrated in the two basins. The basins are sized and located so as to ensure that the stormwater flow rates and volumes resulting from the developed condition are equal to or less than the pre -development condition, therefore preventing hydromodifications, such as increases in the total stormwater volume, runoff velocity, or peak discharge outside the Project site. Through the on -site detention function, these basins and associated infrastructure would also address the City's hydrologic requirements and water quality requirements. The WQMP identifies the structural and non- structural controls and best management practices that will be implemented during the life of the Project to protect water quality. This is achieved through a required Agreement completed in the Final Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-19 October 2023 727 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS WQMP and recorded against the property to ensure site maintenance and periodic City inspection of the private storm drain facilities. See Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR for further discussion of on -site drainage and compliance with relevant requirements regarding drainage. As a standard requirement, the Project site design will incorporate stormwater management by conveying on -site runoff into on -site retention basins with a combined capacity to handle the water quality management plan design capture volume and the controlling 100-year storm event volume, and impacts will be less than significant with the implementation of project design features and Mitigation Measures HWQ-1. See Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, for further analysis. Electric Power The Imperial Irrigation District (IID) will provide electric service to the Project property. As previously stated, existing distribution power poles are located on Avenue 62 and extend approximately 0.64 miles onto the Project property. The power poles continue along Avenue 62 to the Monroe intersection where the above -ground poles extend one -mile north to the Avenue 60 intersection. It is likely that these distribution power poles were installed with operation of the vineyard. The distribution poles onsite are along the unpaved Avenue 62 alignment and will be undergrounded during development of the Avenue 62 extension onto the Project property. The undergrounding of the onsite power lines will not result in significant environmental impacts since utility undergrounding will occur throughout the site. The Project will also underground the existing distribution lines along Avenue 62. The undergrounding of the offsite power lines will take place in the existing right-of-way on the north side of Avenue 62, which is an improved road. Onsite electrical power will be underground. In order to obtain electricity service from IID, it is anticipated that the Project will be required to contribute to the construction of an off -site substation which will serve the substation's regional limits and the Project. The off -site substation required for the Travertine development will be constructed during the Grading Phase A stage. As discussed throughout the DEIR, the precise location of the future IID substation has not yet been determined and its impacts are analyzed at a programmatic level in this DEIR. The future substation must meet the requirements of IID and will be studied with metrics provided by the utility. The location of the 2.5-acre site will be within 2-miles of the Project's northern and northeastern boundaries. IID has indicated that distribution lines to the Project site will be on the order of 16 kV or larger. Lines are expected to be located within public street rights of way and are expected to be underground. Natural Gas Natural gas will be provided to the project site by Southern California Gas Company through the extension of existing natural gas infrastructure. Existing underground natural gas lines are located near the Project property along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, north and northeast of the Project property, respectively. A 4-inch natural gas line is located at the northern side of Avenue 58. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-20 October 2023 728 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS A 4-inch natural gas line travels along Madison Street until approximately 425 feet south of the Madison Street and Avenue 58 intersection. At this location, the gas lines enter the Andalusia Country Club property, northeast of the Project site, and terminates at the southwestern corner of the Andalusia property. Construction impacts associated with the installation of natural gas connections are expected to be confined to trenching in order to extend them to the Project property. Prior to ground disturbance, Project contractors would notify and coordinate with SoCalGas to identify the locations and depths of all existing gas lines and avoid disruption of gas service. The Project is not anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new natural gas facilities which could result in significant environmental effects. The Project's impact to natural gas infrastructure will be less than significant. Telecommunications The Project property is located within the service areas of Frontier and Spectrum for telecommunications. The Project will be able to tie into the existing cable, gas and telecommunications lines, located along Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The line extension will go southerly on Madison and will enter the site on both Avenue 62 west and Madison south of Avenue 62. Any surface disturbance will be stabilized following installation activities. The Project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded telecommunication facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Conclusion The Project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities but will require the extension of water, wastewater, natural gas and telecommunications lines to connect to existing systems. The extension of water, wastewater, natural gas and telecommunication facilities is expected to occur within existing public rights of way where disturbance has already occurred. Coordination with CVWD will be required prior to and during the construction of additional water facilities required to serve the Project and also to maintain CVWD's service in anticipation of expected growth that would occur with or without the Project. These additional facilities comprise the construction of the two on -site reservoirs, five off -site wells and the extension of water lines to the Project site. CVWD standards will be implemented during the development of the proposed wells, water reservoirs, as well as the connection to the existing water lines. The impacts of the on -site reservoirs and connections were considered in the assessment of Project impacts, including but not limited to air quality, noise, and biological resources impacts. Project -level environmental review of the off -site wells will be conducted by CVWD in their role as responsible agency, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. Coordination with IID will be required prior to and during the construction of the proposed off -site substation. The substation will be developed compliant with IID standards. Its development will also be Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-21 October 2023 729 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS evaluated pursuant to CEQA prior to site approval and development. Specifically, project -level environmental review of the substation will be conducted by IID in their role as responsible agency, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure are available. As is discussed above, the Project would result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities and will require the extension of water, wastewater, natural gas and telecommunications lines to connect to existing systems. The extension of water, wastewater, natural gas and telecommunication service to the Project will not result in significant environmental effects. b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? The groundwater basin that will supply the proposed Project is and has been in a state of overdraft for many years. The adjoining CVWD groundwater recharge basins are serving to recharge the aquifer and help bring the basin into balance. CVWD is also relying on other sources of water, including treatment of municipal wastewater and agricultural tail water to augment supplies. The comprehensive Water Management Plan guides efforts to eliminate overdraft, prevent groundwater level decline, protect water quality, and prevent land subsidence. The RUWMP serves as a planning tool that documents actions in support of long-term water resources planning and ensures adequate water supplies are available to meet the existing and future urban water demands. Development of the Project would result in an overall increase in water demand. Water consumed by the Project was analyzed in the Project -specific WSA/WSV (Appendix N.1 and N.2). The analysis of water resources and water supply is based upon the understanding of projected water supplies as developed by CVWD and used the WSA/WSV prepared and adopted for the Project, including estimates of available groundwater, future Colorado River water deliveries, and SWP contract sources. The domestic water supply (potable) for the Project will be the Whitewater River Subbasin in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin via CVWD's potable water distribution system. The Project -specific WSA/WSV analyzed the Project water demand (see Table 4.18-1, Plan A Land Use Summary). Based upon this analysis, the WSA/WSV (revised and approved in June 2021) concluded that the Project would consume approximately 867.47 acre-feet per year (AFY). Project water usage was approved in a letter by CVWD, dated June 24, 2021. This estimation includes indoor and outdoor use for the residential and non-residential areas (see table below). Table 4.18-1 Project Area and Water Usage Proposed Project Indoor Uses 188,200 SF Outdoor Uses 899,155 SF Total Water Usage Annual Demand (AF) 867.47 AF Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-22 October 2023 730 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS According to the most recently adopted (2015) UWMP, the projected urban water demand for the year 2040 is anticipated to be 194,300. The 2015 UWMP was completed by CVWD in compliance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act. The 2015 UWMP evaluates water supplies and take into account the increased growth throughout its service area. As summarized in the WSA/WSV, normal/single dry year and multiple dry year urban water reliability for the Project is 100 percent. Projected water demand associated with the proposed Project would represent 0.45 percent of CVWD's total projected Urban Water demand in 2040, as indicated in Table 4.18-2, Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply. According to the 2015 UWMP, the groundwater basin and other sources of supply are adequate for an average year, single dry year, and multiple dry years for a 20-year period. Table 4.18-2 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply Project Build -Out 20201 2040 Total CVWD Supply 114,600 AFY 1941300 AFY Project Project Demand 867.47 AFY 867.47 AFY Percent of Supply 0.76 % 0.45 Source: Total supply extrapolated from the adopted 2015 UWMP, Table 7-4. Project demand extrapolated from Section 2.6, Tables 10 and 11 of this WSA/WSV, based on a 10-year build -out. Notes: 1. 2030 is the final buildout year for the Travertine Specific Plan Project. Based on the information, analysis, and findings documented in the water WSA for the Project, there is substantial evidence to support a determination that there will be sufficient water supplies to meet the demands of the Project, as well as for future demands of the Project plus all forecasted demands in the next 20 years. CVWD's groundwater replenishment programs establish a comprehensive and managed effort to eliminate overdraft. These programs allow CVWD to maintain the groundwater subbasin as its primary water supply and to recharge the groundwater subbasin as its other supplies are available. CVWD has purchased 115,250 AF of additional annual SWP Table A amount since 2002. Additionally, the City has adopted a water -efficient landscape ordinance equal to or more stringent than CVWD's (in compliance with the Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance). This ordinance requires landscape design that incorporates climate appropriate plant material and efficient irrigation for all new and rehabilitated landscaping projects. Compliance with these ordinances will ensure that the proposed Project reduces water demand to meet target demands. The overall development will be expected to implement water conservation measures to reduce impacts to the public water supply per the CVWD UWMP. Therefore, impacts to water supplies are less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-23 October 2023 731 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? CVWD has developed a Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for Sanitary Sewer Systems. The SSMP covers the management, planning, design, and operation and maintenance of the District's sanitary sewer (wastewater) system. Additionally, CVWD treats nearly 17 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater from approximately 95,000 user accounts. CVWD operates five water reclamation plants and maintains more than 1,100 miles of sewer pipeline and more than 30 lift stations that transport wastewater to the nearest treatment facility. The proposed sewer plan for the Project is illustrated in Exhibit 4.18-1, Conceptual Sewer Plan (above). Project flows would be delivered to CVWD's Wastewater Reclamation Plant No. 4 (WRP-4), located in Thermal. WRP-4 has a plant capacity of 9.5 mgd. The annual average flow to this facility is approximately 4.75 MGD (5,300) AFY. Future flows could reach 34,500 AFY by 2045 without additional conservation. The proposed Project is estimated to generate wastewater at 261,200 gpd, or 0.27 mgd, which is 2.7 percent of the plant's capacity. Effluent from WRP-4 is not currently suitable for water recycling due to the lack of tertiary treatment. However, CVWD plans to add tertiary treatment and reuse effluent from this plant in the future as development occurs. Per CVWD's UWMP, WRP-4 has the potential to be upgraded with a recycled water program with eventual construction of tertiary treatment, plant expansion, and conveyance facilities. The Project will undergo additional review by CVWD and City staff to ensure compliance with all current and applicable wastewater treatment requirements. Therefore, the Project is not expected to exceed CVWD's wastewater capacity demand and impacts are less than significant. d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Cal -Recycle data indicates the Badlands Disposal site has 7,800 cubic yards of remaining capacity, the El Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of 143,977,170 tons of solid waste, and Lamb Canyon Disposal has a remaining solid waste capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards. Using the annual generation factors, including a residential solid waste generation factor of 0.41 tons per dwelling unit from the Riverside County General Plan EIR No. 521, adopted in 2015, and 2.4 tons per 1,000 square feet for the commercial operation, the Project could generate up to 894.48 tons per year of solid waste at full buildout, as indicated in the table below. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-24 October 2023 732 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Table 4.18-3 Annual Solid Waste Generation Land Use Total Rate Solid Waste (tons/year) Residential 1,200 units 0.41 tons 492 per du Commercial Boutique Hotel — 45,000 sf. Resort Villas — 97,500 sf. Banquet Facility—10,000 sf 167,700 sf. 2.4 tons per 402.48 1,000 sf. Spa and Wellness Center - 8,700 sf. Golf Club House —1,000 sf. Golf Club Academy — 5,500 sf Total 894.48 Generation Rates are from the 2015 Riverside County Environmental Impact Report No 521, Public Facilities, Table 4.17-N. As part of its long-range planning and management activities, the Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (RCDWR) ensures that Riverside County has a minimum of 15 years of capacity, at any given time, for future landfill disposal. The 15-year projection of disposal capacity is prepared each year as part of the annual reporting requirements for the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. The most recent 15-year projection by the RCDWR indicates that the remaining disposal capacity of countywide waste facilities in the year 2024 is 28,561,626 tons, and therefore, no additional capacity is needed to dispose of countywide waste through 2024. In addition, all future development would be required to comply with mandatory commercial and residential recycling requirements of Assembly Bill 341. Therefore, the Project will comply with all applicable solid waste statutes, policies, and guidelines; and the Project will be served by a landfill with sufficient capacity to serve the Project. Therefore, impacts relative to solid waste are less than significant. e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The project will comply with all applicable solid waste statutes, policies and guidelines. All development, including the proposed Project, is required to comply with the mandatory commercial and multi -family recycling requirements of Assembly Bill 341. The California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen) applies to all cities in California, and mandates that all new building construction develop a waste management plan that includes diversion of at least 50 percent of construction and demolition material from landfills, through recycling and/or reuse. Prior to applying for a permit, the contractor or property owner must submit a Construction and Demolition Debris Management Plan to the City's Environmental Coordinator. There are no impacts relative to applicable solid waste regulations. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-25 October 2023 733 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 4.18.5 Cumulative Impacts New and existing local development within the City and the surrounding Project area has the potential to result in substantial cumulative impacts. As discussed above, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to utilities and service system because there is adequate capacity to serve the Project. While the Project would require new offsite and onsite stormwater management facilities, these facilities have been designed to avoid potentially significant impacts. Potentially significant impacts resulting from the operation of offsite drainage facilities have been fully mitigated with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-1. As discussed above, the location of the off -site CVWD wells and IID substation has not yet been identified. Project -level environmental review of the wells and substation will be conducted by CVWD and IID, respectively, in their roles as responsible agencies, and once site -specific locations of the infrastructure is available. Water Supply As discussed in the above analysis, the proposed Project's water demand is less than 867.47 acre-feet per year (AFY). The projected water demand associated with the Project would represent approximately 0.45 percent of CVWD's total project Urban Water demand in 2040, as displayed in Table 4.18-6, Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply. CVWD confirmed the Project's estimated water use and extended the applicability of the WSA in a letter dated June 24, 2021. The WSA has been extended through June 24, 2026. The analysis concluded that the Project would not exceed the water supplies available to serve the Project. In fact, it would work to reduce the water demand associated with the previously approved project that included a golf course. Per CVWD's Urban Water Management Plan, CVWD has achieved its 2020 water use target but continues to implement demand management measures to reduce per capita water use. Reduced use is seen in construction for new customers as a result of the implementation of plumbing upgrades required by the building code and updated landscape ordinance requirements. Additionally, the City established a water - efficient landscape ordinance requiring landscape design that incorporates climate appropriate plant material and efficient irrigation for all new and rehabilitated landscaping projects. Compliance with the ordinance will ensure that the proposed Project and future projects reduce water demand to meet target demands. Moreover, CVWD's groundwater replenishment programs establish a comprehensive and managed effort to eliminate overdraft. These programs allow CVWD to maintain the groundwater subbasin as its primary water supply and to recharge the groundwater subbasin as its other supplies are available. The future developments within La Quinta and CVWD's service area will be expected to implement water conservation measures to reduce impacts to the public water supply per the CVWD UWMP. Cumulative impacts to the water supply are not cumulatively considerable. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-26 October 2023 734 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater The Project would result in an increase in wastewater flows collected and treated. Project flows would be delivered to CVWDs Wastewater Reclamation Plant No.4 (WRP-4) located on Avenue 62 at Filmore Street. WRP-4 has a plant capacity of 9.5 mgd and an annualized average daily flow to this facility of approximately 4.75 mgd. At buildout, the proposed Project is estimated to generate wastewater at 261,200 gpd or 0.27 mgd, which is 2.7 percent of the plant's capacity. Proposed projects within the City and other local jurisdictions within CVWD's boundary would be required to undergo environmental review to determine if the existing CVWD wastewater infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the project or if other onsite and off -site improvements would be necessary in order to provide service. As discussed in this document, adequate sewage treatment capacity exists to serve the Project's limited increase to WRP-4 flows. The projected increase in wastewater flows would not require the expansion of wastewater treatment facilities. Additionally, all new development in the City and CVWD service area would be required to complete an environmental analysis per CEQA Guidelines, which would analyze and disclose any potentially significant impacts on wastewater services. Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to wastewater systems. Solid Waste Development projects in and near the City would be analyzed during the development review process to ensure they are designed to comply with all applicable solid waste regulations. As discussed in this section, the Project is conservatively projected to generate approximately 894.48 tons of solid waste per year and 2.45 tons per day. All five landfills operated by Riverside County Department of Waste Resource have the potential for expansion. The Lamb Canyon Landfill has been designed and permitted for expansion and has a new estimated closure date of 2032. The landfill closure dates are estimated dates and subject to change based on actual tonnage received and any future Riverside County Department of Waste Resource re -permitting activities. The landfills serving the City of La Quinta and the Project site have an available remaining capacity. The proposed Project represents a small percentage of the overall remaining capacity of the landfills and would not substantially shorten the life of the landfills. Therefore, Project impacts to solid waste would be less than cumulatively considerable. Electricity IID has adequate policies, programs, and projects in place to provide energy to their users, including the proposed Project, for the foreseeable future. As mentioned previously, IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's planning area will be approximately 11,144,490 kWh (which is equivalent to 11,144.49 MWh), the Project would account for approximately 0.24 percent of IID's total estimated demand in 2031. See Section 4.5, Energy Resources, for further analysis. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-27 October 2023 735 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Natural Gas SoCalGas has adequate policies, programs, and projects in place to provide energy to their users, including the proposed Project, for the foreseeable future. The 2018 California Gas Report (prepared by the gas and electric utility providers in California) estimates natural gas consumption within SoCalGas's planning area will be approximately 2,310 million cf per day in 2030. The Project would consume approximately 0.0033 percent of the 2030 forecasted consumption in SoCalGas's planning area. See Section 4.5, Energy Resources, for further analysis. Therefore, the proposed Project's incremental demand for natural gas would not be cumulatively considerable. SoCalGas engages in a number of energy efficiency and conservation programs and invests in research and development of new and emerging clean, energy -efficient technologies for residential commercial, industrial, power generation, and transportation markets to reduce their energy use. The proposed Project, as well as future developments, would be required to implement the State and regional regulations regarding energy consumption, such as Title 24 codes, in SoCalGas's service area. The use of more energy efficient structures and the use of renewable resources would reduce natural gas consumption in the City and SoCalGas service area. The implementation of new technologies, as well as State guidelines to reduce energy consumption ensure future development does not result in cumulative considerable impacts to SoCalGas's capacity. Telecommunication The Project is located within the service areas of Frontier and Spectrum for telecommunications. The Project will be able to tie into the existing cable, gas, and telecommunications lines, located along Avenue 58 and Madison Street. It is understood that the Project will absorb some of the backbone infrastructure capacity, but that future capacity needs are addressed in utility long-range planning. Future demand generated by the Project and anticipated future projects will be accommodated by these utilities. The Project will result in the limited extension of network -connecting telecommunication infrastructure. The Project would generate a de minimis increase in demand of telecommunication capacity and its incremental demand would not be cumulatively considerable. 4.18.6 Mitigation Measures The Project will not result in impacts to water infrastructure or supply, wastewater infrastructure and capacity, electric, natural gas, or telecommunication infrastructure. Therefore, no Mitigation Measures are required for these topics. 4.18.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Impacts associated with Utilities and Service Systems will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-28 October 2023 736 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 4.18.8 References 1. CalRecylce Estimated Solid Wase Generation Rates, CalRecycle, https://www2.caIrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates#Residential. 2. Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water and Management Planning Website http://www.cvwd.org/543/Urban-Water-Management-Planning. 3. Coachella Valley Water District 2020-2021 Annual Report https://www.cvwd.org/Archive.aspx?AMID=36 4. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Chapter V, Public Infrastructure and Services, Riverside County EIR No. 52, Public Facilities, Section 4.17. 5. County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 Public Review Draft February 2015 httDS://r)lanninE.rctlma.orR/Portals/14/eenDlan/L-eneral plan 2015/DEIR%20521/04- 17 PublicFacilities.pdf. 6. Riverside County Department of Waste Resources https://www.rcwaste.org/business/planning/ciwmp. Travertine Draft EIR 4.18-29 October 2023 737 Page intentionally blank 738 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 4.19 Wildfire 4.19 Wildfire 4.19.1 Introduction This section of the Draft EIR addresses potential wildfire hazard impacts that may result from construction or operation of the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project ("Project"). This section is based on the information contained in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment (Project), the Travertine Fire Master Plan, the La Quinta General Plan, and the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Additional resources consulted in this discussion is cited in Subsection 4.19.8, References, of this section, and Chapter 8.0, References, of this Draft EIR. 4.19.2 Existing Conditions Wildfire Risk A wildfire is an unplanned fire in a natural area such as a forest, grassland, or prairie. Wildfires are often caused by humans or lightning and are exacerbated by steep slopes, dense vegetation (fuel), and dry and windy weather conditions. When these conditions are present, a wildfire can burn quickly and over a vast area, damaging hillsides, essential infrastructure, and homes and other buildings. The City of La Quinta is comprised of both urban and undeveloped lands. The northern and central portions of the City are primarily urbanized, with few remaining vacant areas. Meanwhile, the southern and western portions of the City are primarily vacant, undeveloped and agricultural lands, as well as open space lands of the Santa Rosa Mountains, which conserve important habitat and provide for limited recreational uses (i.e., hiking trails). The Santa Rosa Mountains in the southern portion of the City are characterized by alluvial drainages and include steep slopes that are typically conducive to spreading wildfires. Furthermore, the region's hot, dry summer and autumn weather is considered ideal for generating the dry vegetation that fuel most wildfires, however, wildfires in the undeveloped local mountains adjacent to the Coachella Valley cities are not common due to the mountain's natural rocky terrain, which contain relatively low fuel loads, and therefore does not allow wildfires to spread easily. In addition to the mountains' rocky terrain, the flat urban and developed areas of the City of La Quinta are considered low wildfires areas, as indicated in the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR). Within the urban context of La Quinta, landscaped areas throughout the City are carefully maintained and watered regularly, creating conditions that limit the possibility for vegetation fires to ignite and spread. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-1 October 2023 739 4.19 WILDFIRE Wildland Urban Interface A Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) is the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetation fuels. People and man- made structures in WUI areas are more susceptible to the impacts of wildfires due to their adjacency to areas that provide fuel to wildfires, such as forests with dense vegetation. The City of La Quinta is situated at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, introducing an urban- wildland interface to the western and southern portions of the City. The Project site is located in the southern portion of the City, east of the Santa Rosa Mountains. As stated previously, the Santa Rosa Mountain's natural terrain is rocky and contains relatively low fuel loads. These limited vegetative conditions in the City's mountain ranges and WUI, are unlikely to cause a major wildfire. CALFIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones CALFIRE has established and updated mapping of high fire zones in California. The CALFIRE fire maps indicate areas that have high risk of fires based on topography, vegetation, and proximity to WUI, which are then categorized as Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) in State Responsibility Areas (SRA), or Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) are those lands within California that meet specific geographic and environmental criteria. These are areas where CALFIRE has legal and financial responsibility for wildland fire protection. SRAs are defined as lands that (1) are county incorporated areas; (2) are not federally owned; (3) have wildland vegetation cover rather than agricultural or ornamental plants; (4) have watershed and/or range/forage value; and (5) have housing densities not exceeding three units per acre. Where SRAs contain built environment or development, the responsibility for fire protection of those improvements (non-wildland) is that of a local government agency. The Project property does not lie in an SRA FHSZ. The southeastern side of the property, however, is located adjacent to an area designated as "Moderate" FHSZ in an SRA. See Exhibit 4.19-1 below. However, the area southeast of the Project does not contain vegetative fuel for wildfires. Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs) include land within incorporated cities, cultivated agriculture lands and non-flammable areas in unincorporated areas and those lands that do not meet the criteria for SRA or Federal Responsibility Areas (FRAs). LRA fire protection is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, and counties, and by CALFIRE under contract to local governments. The City and Project site are not located near or adjacent to Very High FHSZ in LRA. California Wildfire Perimeter Maps In addition to the CALFIRE fire maps, CALFIRE mapped California wildfire perimeters dating back to the 1950s. According to the wildfire perimeter map, the closest large (5,000 or more acres) fire to the Project property was the Palm Fire (July 1994), approximately 10 miles west of the subject site. A Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-2 October 2023 740 4.19 WILDFIRE smaller fire occurred in 1975, approximately 0.25 miles east of the Project property, on agricultural land uses. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-3 October 2023 741 LA QUINTA CITY LIMITS Palms OovwmfrmCWs81tT6lpdtmauVreCitliom(eDspaerwntdFawtrir.ndRnP�oMal{on(CAS.flREjlotdwiffy ran dwry nm irurd aewry moan w�Irbr lean Repora6ilyAraaa Q IIAi, tdpPbg dM emaa mtaevd b a very IR��» Msnrd t?erarlb7enee (VNfIIQt). Iab.aW an dda.gd mWYe aL pabapal IrY aY.r.9pd0 LA QUINTA SOI W than horbm and IMh aeeoabnsd eapaMd ae behomft. and 00000 burn Pd ab0dw b *W" tw Mahood sidnsbsedwpalelankee�owae(brhArplbab.nds?bWlAnpr.Oendlamdmpra�tandapasYbegdallnp RrpondblbyArm wpm State Responsibtlity Area - Fire Hazard Severity Zane Claw1y b b. ffW&I"b and am �+bnHq Vaasa based On.nwo.ed science. 1 Moderate inb be db*m in WK Nam Et Cditmb dit Cammbgm sdcood Cddwft 8u1 ft Cods C mPW TA High a �YIM@b �5 YKldeporblrnto�srkpa a �arbu s �tranrranarr The .,dn i. firs - Very 9h low aswftmnn MlbeumdbyluldMr &kWstatrwwk largpm.. 1n LRAThsupddWmnaswi0 bob. iwed to Wamlly pop" %tww amwin T.A amply wnh mWMMindsdbdaasemgWmmeau@t*mdproperb eats end 10n root deisndbks epacedurance. n Is Qkdy Old Im Ire Nuord arm* aoaea wd be used for Wdeba b Local Responsibility Area - Fire rnyoma the *dityeWawda plow Hazard Severity Zone Class Tfkapeanomaptabaramel.apmpMoham oft Wain odomWA nd ppa.anlCALFW$moennrMeAbn `,u,..I High rM Wry INph FH87ewrndn ins loalprbdlepon Tlr pmaese dNrdtrbp dyes beundrlw Ynrolved sn eaMneiW CILLA 'p7 Tantrom �wWWAb mW) dataft ofeay arpmamvdMbw in days Eo desi�Wq by onfirwMe. way Mir*aMU irr noon wN& `iumbd non dM moslrYp wa moarons�on teed p dammmd can add additional VNFHM Thom b no mgkwwd br local powmnn b mpat nrirnnd adm b CAL FIRE wean to reaunar ended tunas r Mlles 0 0.5 1 2 / —. — — _.� �{ Wspled. Cmee�, uesm am dimated b ds mWWiela kal ank (camty, eDt am dWsfw nt or Fire Ptcledion Dbblel todeYnMe Ir stabs d Am bad rfm hard m m ordrwbs. Indian \ 1 Wells JI Indio La Quinta I Coachelia MSA CONSULTING, INC, s 71 11')N riff- s —I','I F ill jT,IFrgitii_r it I A%4rr *yi�i- `' .2 1 4 1 I ( 1 1 1 _ Sandy ..Zt'") Komar 1 1 I 9 1 Valerie FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE TRAVERTINE W - - UJ N i LU W � , NNv��r 0 W � Q '1YI �i 8 ^ < x CL 11 iJ i� Q IV LU Z > 0 E E I ui LA VBI > I p -- 2 w L X W _ c N E Lu cn a m • a`> C� c CJ Ca J N O Cn W W CY LL J Q U ARK.0 Z Cl/J u z Ld is of Ul'O 1_ A 4.19 WILDFIRE Post -Fire Slope Instability As stated previously, the scarce and scattered vegetation on the slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains, do not provide adequate fuel to sustain a wildfire. Therefore, fire threat is low in the City of La Quinta, including areas adjacent to the mountains, and post -fire slope instability and flooding is not likely in areas adjacent to the Santa Rosa Mountains. La Quinta Fire Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). The RCFD provides 24-hour fire protection and emergency medical services to the City. Within La Quinta, there are three city -owned fire stations, each staffed with full-time paid and volunteer firefighters. The City Fire Department provides staffing for three paramedic assessment engine companies, each responding from a city -owned fire station as noted below: • Fire Station No. 32, located at 78-111 Avenue 52, houses primary and reserve fire engines. • Fire Station No. 70, located at 54-001 Madison Street, houses primary and reserve fire engines, and a volunteer squad vehicle. • Fire Station No. 93, located at 44-555 Adams Street, houses a primary and reserve engine. To help establish appropriate fire insurance premiums for residential and commercial properties, insurance providers rely in part on a community's fire protection services. That information is provided by the Insurance Services Offices (ISO). The ISO assigns a Public Protection Classification from 1 to 10, where 1 generally represents superior property fire protection, and 10 indicates that the area's fire suppression program does not meet ISO minimum criteria. La Quinta has an ISO classification of 4. Ratings are reviewed periodically. A variety of criteria are used to determine the ISO rating, such as staffing levels, response times, safety history and building code standards. Fire Station No. 70 is the closest to the Project site and would be a first responded during a call for service. This station is equipped with a primary engine, a brush fire engine, and a volunteer squad vehicle. Current minimum staffing for all fire stations includes three firefighters per front -roll fire engine. Volunteer Reserve firefighters are used to supplement paid staff. The City relies on mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdictions to provide additional fire protection services when necessary through Riverside County Fire Department stations. All calls are dispatched through the County's centralized Riverside County Fire Department Emergency Command Center, which determines the responding station(s) or engine company based on the closest resource. Under this operating system, the closest appropriate unit(s) is sent regardless of jurisdiction. 4.19.3 Regulatory Setting State Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-6 October 2023 744 4.19 WILDFIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) protects over 31 million acres of California's privately -owned wildlands and provides varied emergency services in 36 of the State's 58 counties via contracts with local governments. The Department's Fire Protection Program includes brush clearance, prescribed fire, defensible space inspections, emergency evacuation planning, fire prevention education, fire hazard severity mapping, and fire -related law enforcement activities. CALFIRE's Fire and Resources Assessment Program (FRAP) provides the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Maps for State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) (discussed in Section 4.19.2, Existing Conditions, of this Wildfire Section). The fire maps allow state and local agencies to identify areas susceptible to wildfire hazards. California Fire Code Title 24 Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), also referred to as the California Fire Code in the California Building Standards Code, is published by the order of the California legislature every three years. The building regulations, or standards, in the Fire Code have the same force of law and applies to occupancies in the State of California. Regulations of the California Fire Code shall be enforced by the State Fire Marshal, the chief of any city of county fire department or fire protection district, and their authorized representatives, in their respective areas of jurisdiction. Local Riverside County Fire Department The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), in cooperation with CAL FIRE, provides Fire and Emergency Services to residents of unincorporated areas of Riverside County and to their partner cities, including La Quinta. City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Plan The City prepared the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to address the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City of La Quinta. The EOP describes the operations of the City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Center (EOC), which is the central management entity responsible for directing and coordinating the various City of La Quinta Departments and other agencies in their emergency response activities. The La Quinta EOP identifies, analyzes and ranks hazards faced by the County and the City. The hazards are ranked from 1 to 19, with 1 indicating a higher priority/likelihood, and 19 indicating a lower priority/likelihood. The City EOP ranks wildland fires as 7 out of 19 on the list. These hazards Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-7 October 2023 745 4.19 WILDFIRE arise from a combination of reasons including the undeveloped and rugged terrain, highly flammable brush -covered land, and long, dry summers. City of La Quinta Emergency Services Division The Emergency Services Division is responsible for emergency preparedness in the City. The Division is responsible for both planning and implementation of emergency response efforts, and coordinates with other local jurisdictions and the County of Riverside in emergency response planning, training and disaster exercises. Close coordination with both the Police and Fire Departments is included in all disaster planning efforts. In addition, the City participates in the California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) program, and FEMA's National Incident Management System (NIMS), to assure coordinated response at the state and federal levels. La Quinta Local Hazard Mitigation Plan The La Quinta Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) was established to identify the County's and City's hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences, and set goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and man-made hazards. The plan identifies vulnerabilities, provides recommendations for prioritized mitigation actions, evaluates resources and identifies mitigation shortcomings, provides future mitigation planning and maintenance of existing plan. Per the LHMP, wildfires are not considered within the top five hazards faced by the City. La Quinta General Plan Compliant with California Government Code Section 65300, the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) was designed to function as an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies that regulates the development of lands within the City's corporate boundaries and Sphere of Influence (SOI). The LQGP discusses environmental hazards and public infrastructure and services with the City of La Quinta and SOL Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards, of the LQGP addresses the various environmental components within the City that could potentially generate hazardous conditions for its residents. The Fire Hazard Element in Chapter IV identifies existing fire hazards in the City and describes regulatory requirements to effectively manage the hazard by setting goals, policies, and programs that safely manage fire hazards in the City. Chapter IV was recently updated and adopted in February 2022. Additionally, the Open Space and Conservation Element of the LQGP states that all lands having a 20 percent slope or greater has been designated as open space in order to protect the public from hazards associated with hillside development, such as inaccessibility for fire and emergency services, lack of water for fire control, wildfires, and similar risks. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-8 October 2023 746 4.19 WILDFIRE La Quinta Municipal Code The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) regulations relevant to fire hazards and safety are discussed within the LQMC in the following chapters: Title 8 Buildings and Construction, Chapter 8.08 Fire Code: • 8.08.010, Adoption of the California Fire Code: The City of La Quinta adopted and shall apply all documents marked and designated as the "2019 California Fire Code", including supporting documents and appendices of the 2019 California Fire Code. • 8.08.020, Amendments to the California Fire Code: This code outlines the amendments made to the California Fire Code which are applicable to the City of La Quinta. Title 3 Revenue and Finance, Chapter 3.17, Fire and Police Facilities and Equipment Fund and Traffic Signalization Fund: • 3.17.010 (A), Created: The Fire and Police Facilities and Equipment Fund is a special fund that provides sites, facilities, and equipment which will be required by the demand for services from new developments in the City. • 3.17.020, Development Fees: A development fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for residential or nonresidential construction. 4.19.4 Project Impact Analysis Thresholds of Significance The following standards and criteria for establishing significance of potential impacts related to wildfire hazard impact were derived from the CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, development of the Project would result in a significant impact if it would: a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Methodology Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-9 October 2023 747 4.19 WILDFIRE To determine whether the significance criteria outlined in Appendix G in the CEQA Guidelines applies to the Project property, CALFIRE fire maps were examined together with the Travertine Fire Master Plan. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.19-1, above, the Project's southeastern property boundary (entire site) is located adjacent to a moderate FHSZ in an SRA. Since the CALFIRE fire map identified the Project's location near a moderate FHSZ, the following discussion analyzes the potential impacts of wildfire and the development of the Project. Travertine Fire Master Plan The Travertine Fire Master Plan reflects the collaboration with Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) and CALFIRE to provide in-depth information on the proposed Project to aid in determining the level of service proposed for the Specific Plan Project area. Specifically, the Fire Master Plan: • Profiles the current fire protection and emergency services system to the existing site, including the capabilities and limitations of the system. • Identifies the methods that will aid in fire suppression, their property, and the environment. • Identifies an area of refuge for residents and visitors to be used in an emergency. • Provides an informal evacuation study using alternative routes. The Travertine Fire Master Plan was utilized in this analysis to determine whether the development of the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment Project would result in impacts involving wildfires. The following discussions outline the evacuation, response, and mitigation measures provided in the Travertine Fire Master Plan. Project Impacts a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The City of La Quinta has various resources addressing emergency response within the City boundaries; however, the primary resource includes the City's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The La Quinta EOP addresses emergency management within four defined phases including (1) Preparedness, (2) Response, (3) Recovery, and (4) Mitigation. Consistent with the City EOP, the Travertine Fire Master Plan determines methods that prepare, respond, and mitigate hazards, such as fire and wildfires that could occur onsite. The discussion below lists the ways the Project is compliant with the EOP's emergency management phases. Preparedness Per the EOP, the preparedness phase involves activities that are undertaken in advance of an emergency or disaster. These activities develop operational capabilities and effective responses to a Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-10 October 2023 748 4.19 WILDFIRE disaster and may include mitigation activities, emergency/disaster planning, training and exercises, and public education. Consistent with the preparedness phase, the Project's Fire Master Plan acts as a guide to prepare the site and address potential hazards created by fires and provides methods that would aid in fire suppression and protect future residents and visitors. The methods allow the Project and City Fire Department to establish and evaluate areas of weakness at the Project site and mitigate those areas before an emergency occurs. This would result in effective responses to reduce the impacts of an emergency event at the Project. The preparedness methods in the Fire Master Plan include analyzing Project access, evacuation routes, required water flows, and an area of refuge, and are discussed below. Project Access As discussed throughout this DEIR, the subject property is located in a relatively isolated area of the City where access to public streets does not yet exist. Per the Circulation Element in the La Quinta General Plan, buildout of the City includes the westerly extension of Avenue 62, the southerly extension of Madison Street from Avenue 60 into the Project site, and the southerly extension of Jefferson Street from Avenue 58. The Project proposes the future planned access to include 1) the westward extension of Avenue 62 and an associated all-weather crossing of Dike No. 4, 2) the southerly extension of Jefferson Street from Avenue 58 into the Project site meeting up with Avenue 62, and 3) the southerly extension of Madison Street over Dike No. 4 as an emergency vehicle access route (see Exhibit 4.19-3, Interim Circulation Plan and Exhibit 3.14, Circulation Plan). From the initiation of site development, emergency access will be available via the Avenue 62 extension and construction of a secondary access from the southerly extension of Madison Street as a 24-foot emergency vehicle access (EVA) road that crosses Dike No. 4 and continues south to the Project site. The Project proponent will obtain permissions from the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to cross Dike No. 4. The Project proponent will be responsible for securing the license agreement from the BOR for the Madison EVA. The master homeowner's association (HOA) will be responsible for maintenance of the common ownership areas including the emergency evacuation access route. Avenue 62 will be initially designed to provide three travel lanes (two evacuation (exiting) lanes and one incoming lane to allow for emergency services) within a 46-foot pavement section. The Madison Street EVA will provide two paved 12-foot travel lanes within a 24-foot pavement section. During emergencies, the Madison Street EVA will connect to the Loop Street to divert some vehicles from the Avenue 62 entrance. The internal Project local loop street will have a typical right-of-way of 70 feet, with curb -to -curb distances of 40 feet with 12-foot travel lanes for cars (one lane each way), 8- foot bike lanes, 9-foot curb adjacent landscaped parkways, and a 6-foot-wide pedestrian walkway on both sides. Additionally, local internal roads will provide two travel lanes within 32-foot and 36-foot Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-11 October 2023 749 4.19 WILDFIRE paved sections. All emergency vehicle access roads, including dedicated EVA routes, shall be designed to support the imposed emergency vehicle loads. Apart from the Jefferson Street extension (at the northwest corner of the Project) and the extension of Avenue 62 (east of the Project), the residential communities within the Project boundaries will be gated for privacy. The gates and entrances to the community will not restrict access to the site for emergency services. The project will provide Opti-con sensors that are strategically located so gates are open when the engines arrive. The location of any proposed gates will be reviewed and approved by the City as part of either a tentative tract map application or as part of a site plan review application. City staff, including Police and Fire Department staff, would review site plans and provide conditions of approval that are specific to the provision of emergency access on a project -by -project basis. Evacuation Studies Evacuation studies were also completed for Phase 1 of Project construction analyzing evacuation times from the various points of access during this phase of construction. Table 4.19-1, Non -Flood Evacuation Route Response Times, shows the evacuation route times for the Madison Street EVA and the extension of Avenue 62. A conservative estimate of 1,200 evacuating vehicles (600 homes, 2 vehicles per home) may be higher than the actual number of vehicles evacuating as many families would likely drive in one vehicle (versus multiple vehicles). Additionally, the time of day could determine the number of vehicles evacuating the Project. For example, some vehicles may already be off -site during typical work hours. However, a conservative approach was used for purposes of estimating worst case evacuation requirements. Table 4.19-1 Non -Flood Event Evacuation Route Response Times Route Minutes Ave 62 26:26:00 Madison Street EVA 29:00:00 During flood events, the extension of Avenue 62 would be the only evacuation route during Phase 1 and evacuation could be completed within 43 minutes. As a point of reference, an evacuation time of 33 minutes is considered good for this type of community, and the longer evacuation time during flood events is acceptable. Wildfires originating closer to the community could allow significantly less time for evacuation than would be required and could make one or more evacuation route not usable. The Travertine Fire Master Plan offers decision makers with contingency options, including evacuating or relocating a portion of the community (much lower number of vehicles and faster evacuation time, proportional to the vehicle total being relocated), or not immediately evacuating any of the residents if it is safer to shelter on site. Exhibit 4.19-4 illustrates the evacuation route plan as provided in the Fire Master Plan. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-12 October 2023 750 4.19 WILDFIRE This EIR also includes an evacuation analysis for full Project buildout, based on 2,760 total cars to evacuate. Three lanes will be used for evacuation: one lane via the Madison Street EVA, one lane via Avenue 62, and one lane via Jefferson Street. The tables below show the assumed number of cars, evacuation route capacity, and evacuation times. Table 4.19-2 Assumed Number of Cars DU Cars Per DU/Land Use Total Cars Residential Units 1,200 DU 2 cars per DU 2,400 Resort and 38 staff 1 car per staff Resort Villas 100 Villas 1 car per villa 138 10 staff 1 car per staff Golf Training Facility 35 golfers 1 car per golfer 45 Banquet Facility 27 staff 1 car per staff 177 150 guests 1 car per guest Total 2,760 Table 4.19-3 Evacuation Route Capacity Lanes Cars Per Lane Road Length - LF Total Car Capacity for Egress Jefferson Street 1 920 16,300 920 Avenue 62 1 920 9,400 920 Madison EVA 1 920 8,800 920 Table 4.19-4 Non -Flood Event Evacuation Times Seconds Time (h:mm:ss) Jefferson Street Headway Per Car 4 0:00:04 Total Headway Per Lane 3680 1:01:20 Time for Evacuation of First Car @ 35 mph 318 0:05:18 Evacuation Time 3998 1:06:38 Avenue 62 Headway Per Car 4 0:00:04 Total Headway Per Lane 3680 1:01:20 Time for Evacuation of First Car @ 35 mph 166 0:02:46 Evacuation Time 3863 1:04:06 Madison EVA Headway Per Car 4 0:00:04 Total Headway Per Lane 3680 1:01:20 Time for Evacuation of First Car @ 35 mph 171 0:02:51 Evacuation Time 3851 1:04:11 The analysis bears the evacuation time of 1-hour and 7-minutes for all residents to be out of the project. In cases of flood events, the extension of Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street will be the only evacuation routes out of the development. In this case, evacuation analysis shows that the development can be Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-13 October 2023 751 4.19 WILDFIRE completely evacuated in just over 1-hour and 37 minutes via Jefferson Street and 1 hour and 34 minutes if via Avenue 62. Emergencies requiring a full project evacuation originating closer to the community could allow significantly less time for evacuation than would be required and could make one or more evacuation route usable. The Travertine community offers contingency options, including evacuating or relocating a portion of the community (much lower number of vehicles and faster evacuation time, proportional to the vehicle total being relocated), or not immediately evacuating any of the residents if it is safer to shelter on site. Exhibit 4.19-5 illustrates the evacuation route plan. Area of Refuge An onsite area of refuge would be located on the Open Space Recreational planned areas and community recreation centers, to accommodate residents and their cars. The community recreation centers will be noncombustible structures that can be used as shelters as well as contain trained staff and AED devices that are regularly maintained. This area will serve as temporary safe zone for evacuees during an emergency and will provide basic needs, such as food, water, and restrooms. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-14 October 2023 752 r r o u p o j 4A ThQ QuarrY .4 i �-- Ah d a' Al c o r mutiat bre N AF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Mm DA E 1"ez R01;k S!ide .EGENC W-wo eHersOn $1m9l r Avenue L-2 �l maMd C:rc4e 1.,sg LflaP CmDlleNor %w-V Aq,"g Roll Roundabout TpnVaraiy EVA Gals WA. -CON SU LT1 N Q I N C- CIRCULATION PLAN (PHASE 1) I J r J C a - IVII F 141f'iNFF� A: !qQ. m 1j. %; 14f.. TRAVERTINE Source: Travertine Fire Master Plan, TIRG Land, Inc. EXHIBITV?9-3 � WW YXIII 77. EMERdENCY ACCESS l EGRESS EVACUATION LANE I FIRST RESPONDERS INGRESS ROUTE 11 INTERIM PROJECT � NFWOMT I �tirr-r ' 2 �rdtV$flfJ$ 5�, a� BRIDGE ELEVATION ABOVE 100 YEAR FLOOD EVENT r ..._j 1 P6TENTIAL AREA OF REFVGE ` LiY;uND Gollaetor Street s m E Vk Source: Travertine Fire Master Plan, TRG Land, Inc. [ f. CONSULTING. INC _ EVACUATION ROUTE PLAN (PHASE 1) �a,1-=FJr41NC } -7IVI e1af-rl'•IFA:l4t.m,.r..;' :i r Fr.'I4f.r TRAVEI NE EXHIBIT 9-4 THE QLN PRY 920 CARS kp 600 CARS � � r PROJECT AlDPOfNT 4 Ij Lm 6ND i fum4mbion Muk Source: Travertine Fire Master Plan, TRG Land, Inc. TES 71AL APEA OF REFUGE P SA.- ONSULTING. INC _ EVACUATION ROUTE PLAN (BUILDOUT) � a,l-=F�r,1h1� } - nrt F 1af'iNF` H:!4L. m ,.i. `;' TRAVERTINE EXHIBI77�19-5 4.19 WILDFIRE Water and Fire Flows Prior to any site development, the Project will construct water lines and hydrants to provide required fire flows. The Project will provide all wet and dry utilities from Avenue 62 to the point of connection serving each phase of development. All water mains and fire hydrants will be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code Appendix B and C in effect at the time of development. The La Quinta Fire Department shall set minimum fire flows for each Project development area. In addition, the level of service required for the Project align with the criteria for Category II — Urban, outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan as follows: • Increased Project Mitigation Features in Phase I • Alternative Construction Requirements and Equivalencies Features in Phase I Pursuant to the approved Travertine Fire Master Plan, Category II criteria is accomplished by implementing features, such as providing for higher water pressures and volumes, implementing 5A level instead of 5B building construction standards, and providing emergency standby power facilities. Response and Recovery According to the EOP, initial response is primarily structured to minimize the effects of the emergency or disaster and includes protection of property and human life. Examples include, disseminating alerts and warnings to the community; coordinating evacuations and/or rescue operations; clearing priority transportation routes; repairing critical facilities and structures; conducting initial damage assessment and surveys; and coordinating the restriction of traffic/people movement and unnecessary access to affected areas. Recovery activities begin when the disaster or event begins and involves the restoration of services to the public and returning the affected area(s) to pre -emergency conditions. Wildfire and other emergencies are often fluid events and the need for evacuations are typically determined by on -scene first responders or by a collaboration between first responders and designated emergency response teams, including the City's Office of Emergency Services, established for larger emergency events. As such, and consistent with emergency evacuation plans, the Fire Master Plan and the EIR supports existing pre -plans and provides evacuation protocol, and emergency event -specific directives. Specifically, for the Travertine site and its residents and visitors, emergency response efforts include establishing an area of refuge described above. This area will be away from any flammable Project structures or flammable landscape materials. Pedestrian, vehicular and emergency vehicle access will be provided to this area, and ADA requirements will be observed. The proposed location of on -site area of refuge will be on an open space area. The Travertine Project will coordinate with the responding fire agencies and others to finalize a location to use as a temporary evacuation area of refuge. The Project establishes methods for response in the event, such as providing an area of refuge and establishing routes and water infrastructure for the Project. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-18 October 2023 756 4.19 WILDFIRE Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.14 (Public Services), enhanced fire service mitigation measures to maintain fire service objectives. Please refer to Mitigation Measures PS-1 and PS-2. Response would be provided by fire services. As stated above, the station nearest to the Project site is Fire Station No. 70, located at 54-001 Madison Street. This station is equipped with a primary engine, a brush fire engine, and a volunteer squad vehicle. Current minimum staffing for all fire stations includes 3 firefighters per front -roll fire engine. Volunteer Reserve firefighters are used to supplement paid staff. The southeastern portion of the City is experiencing new development and increased fire service demand. In order to provide an acceptable future level of service for the southeastern portion of the City, the City has preliminary plans for a future fire station located at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. The future fire station will serve the southern portion of the City, including the Project site and surrounding area, and further improve response times in this area. The City of La Quinta will fund its share of the fire station costs through the fire facilities portion of the City's Development Impact Fees program. Mitigation According to the EOP, mitigation efforts occur both before and after emergencies or disasters. Mitigation activities may include: amending local ordinances and statues, such as zoning, building codes, and other enforcement codes; initiating structural retrofitting measures; assessing tax levies; flood control projects; and diminishing fuel in areas having a high potential for wildfires. The Project includes design features to be implemented during construction and operation phases to provide the Project with infrastructure that would reduce the risk of the spread of fires at the site. The design features include required Project fire flows and systems, the collection and storage of water at two water reservoirs in the southwest portion of the site, and back-up generators for the booster pumps, and fuel breaks to limit spread of wildfire. Additionally, the Project proposes a buffer area along the perimeter of the proposed development areas to separate the CVMSHCP Conservation Area (west and south of the site) and the residential/resort planning areas. This buffer would take the form of the proposed perimeter trail with the native plant revegetation between the trail and the residential lots (Planning Areas 13 and 16). The establishment of defensible space includes not placing vegetative fuels near open space Conservation Areas. Consistent with the City EOP, the Fire Master Plan and outline actions that prepare, respond, recover, and address hazards involved with fires and wildfires. Thus, Project construction and operational activities would not substantially impair the City's adopted EOP. b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-19 October 2023 757 4.19 WILDFIRE The physical characteristics of the Project site indicate a low probability for wildfire risk due to the sparse vegetation and topographic conditions. Although the Project site and surrounding areas do not provide conditions conducive to wildfires, the Project proposes open space areas and fuel breaks which will further reduce the likelihood that the Project would be impacted by fires or wildfires. A fuel break is a strip or block of land on which the vegetation and debris have been reduced and/or modified to control or diminish the risk of the spread of fire crossing the strip or block of land. Fuel breaks are located at strategic locations on the landscape as part of a conservation management system for a land unit where there is a need to control the risk of the spread of fire. Typically, they break up large, continuous tracts of dense natural fuels, thus limiting uncontrolled spread of fire. Open space areas with reduced vegetation act as fuel breaks and provides defensible space between wildland and urban areas. The proposed Project will establish a buffer of open space areas adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide. Habitable structures are not proposed adjacent to the toe of slope of the neighboring mountains. Planning Area 20, located at the southern portion of the site, occupies approximately 301.2 acres adjacent to the Martinez Rockslide landform. Planning Area 20 is designated for Open Space Natural land uses and will separate the proposed habitable structures by approximately 950 feet. Additionally, approximately 250 feet of open space areas will separate the proposed structures from Coral Mountain to the north. The Project also proposes an open space edge condition around the perimeter of the developmental planning areas of the Project site. Exhibit 4.19-6, Edge Conditions, illustrates the proposed edge conditions and locations around the perimeter of the residential, resort, and open space recreational planning areas. The edge condition separates these planning areas where development will occur from Planning Area 20 and the slopes of the surrounding mountains. The edge/transitional landscape treatment that surrounds the community is native untouched desert, and then a band of transitional landscape planting will occur that will have native plant reseeding and native tree planting. This edge/transitional planting area will vary in width according to location. In development areas where private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas are adjacent to the Conservation Area, the buffer would be a minimum width of 74 feet. These areas will be landscaped with native vegetation, which will link and extend the character of the undisturbed desert areas surrounding the Project to the disturbed interior of the Project. Desert plants native to the surrounding area will be applied as hydromulch or equivalent to temporarily disturbed areas associated with Project construction. Native trees will be planted in patterns and density to match the surrounding desert. Only the trees will be irrigated. Dense vegetation is not proposed in this area. As such, the edge conditions landscaped with native plants will act as defensible space (i.e., areas with little vegetative fuel for wildfires), separating the Project's developable planning areas from the open space areas surrounding the Project. Overall, wildfires and their effects are not expected to Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-20 October 2023 758 4.19 WILDFIRE affect the Project site due to the Project's open space areas and proposed fuel breaks as part of the Project design, as well as the lack of vegetative fuels in the surrounding area. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-21 October 2023 759 .hr• �YLxyri{� �' �ti •�_ � _ ''ai' ter• • .r '• :• �• •• •l�,{ A '. ,•ski•}'.7���•• � •• ,�� • 4.19 WILDFIRE c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment The Project property is currently undeveloped and vacant and is not served by roads, electrical utilities, natural gas utilities, water, and other utilities or infrastructure. Supporting utilities and infrastructure will be developed with the implementation of the Project site. The required utilities and Project design features are described as follows: Roads As previously stated, access to the Project site will occur from Avenue 62, east of the Project, and emergency access will occur at the southerly extension of Madison Street. In order to provide construction access to the site Avenue 62 would be constructed to cross Dike No. 4 and extend westerly towards the Travertine Project boundary before the start of construction. This will allow construction equipment to access the site from this location. Jefferson Street is also proposed to be developed from the northwest Project corner to meet the extension of Avenue 62. The Madison Street EVA will provide emergency access to the Project site. The master homeowner's association will be responsible for maintenance and repair of the common ownership areas, including the proposed EVA routes. The development of roads typically involves the removal of vegetation along the proposed road, which removes wildfire fuel, and thus, does not exacerbate fire risk. Additionally, roads could be dirt or gravel (during construction), and asphalt (during construction and operation). The removal of vegetative fuels and the use of gravel material and asphalt act as a fuel break, reducing the spreading of fires. Additionally, asphalt and all-weather access roads will allow public and emergency access to the Project during construction and operation. The proposed roads will not exacerbate fire risks. Fuel Breaks As stated in threshold discussion b, above, the Project will establish open space and landscaped areas throughout the property as a part of Project design. The proposed open space land use areas and landscaped edge condition will act as a fuel break for fires if they were to occur in the area. See Exhibit 4.19-6, Edge Conditions, and Planning Area 20 is designated for Open Space Natural land uses and will separate the proposed habitable structures by approximately 950 feet. Additionally, approximately 250 feet of open space areas will separate the proposed structures from Coral Mountain to the north. The fuel break will reduce the Project's potential for exacerbated fire risks. Water CVWD provides domestic water service to the Travertine Project. Currently, domestic water lines exist in the intersection of Avenue 60 and Madison Street and the Monroe Street and Avenue 62 Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-23 October 2023 761 4.19 WILDFIRE intersection. Water during grading and construction will be provided by CVWD from an existing hydrant supplying canal water located within the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Ponds. One off -site well will be constructed during the Construction Phase 1 stage. Additional facilities will include two water reservoirs and booster stations to convey and store the well water. The future water lines will be located underground. The proposed reservoirs will be located aboveground and isolated on the slopes of the Martinez Rockslide. The reservoirs will include the development of an access road (discussed above) and landscaped berms to screen them from public view. CVWD establishes guidelines in their Development Design Manual (May 2022) to ensure that water infrastructure is reviewed and developed to CVWD standards. The Development Design Manual requires review from fire services prior to approval of the Project, and establishes regulations that ensure projects within their service area are equipped with fire -reducing systems (such as fire hydrants, sprinklers, etc.). The Project shall comply with the development standards of CVWD's Design Manual. Therefore, the Project's compliance with CVWD's established regulations will ensure that water infrastructure would not exacerbate fire risk. Electricity Electric service to Travertine will be provided by IID. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Project electricity power will be installed underground. An off -site substation will be required for the Travertine Project and will be constructed during the Construction Phase 1 stage. The 2.5-acre site required for the substation will be located east of Dike 4 and within the off -site utility field. All off -site parcels required for utilities will be chosen to fit the requirements of IID consistent with their Wild Fire Mitigation Plan 2020-2022, which states that IID electric facilities are to be designed and constructed meeting or exceeding relevant federal, State, and industry standards. The California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) General Order (GO) 95 is a key industry standard for design and construction for overhead electrical facilities. Additionally, IID monitors and follows, as appropriate, the National Electric Safety Code. Additional fire hazard reduction measures include: no new power lines in high or extreme fire threat areas; vegetation management and inspections; and public safety power shutoff. These measures, as well as additional measures outlined in the Wild Fire Mitigation Plan 2020 -2022, reduce the risk of the infrastructure - exacerbating wildfires. With the Project's compliance with CVWD, IID, and La Quinta Fire Department standards and guidelines, development of the Project roads, water infrastructure, and electrical infrastructure would not exacerbate fire risk. Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-24 October 2023 762 4.19 WILDFIRE d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The currently undeveloped and vacant Project site is located in the southern portion of La Quinta, situated between Coral Mountain on the north, and the Martinez Rockslide on the south. Vegetation in the Project area and the surrounding lands is relatively sparse due to the rocky soils in the alluvial fan and very dry conditions in which the Project is located. The existing vegetation communities onsite include creosote scrub, and desert scrub, generally on loosely packed or sandy soils. These conditions do not support dense vegetation growth. Therefore, fuels for fires are not present or is very limited. Development of the Project will not occur on or adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain to the north, or the Martinez Rockslide to the south. As a part of project design, the areas adjacent to Coral Mountain and Martinez Rockslide will be preserved as Open Space Recreational and Natural lands. This will ensure habitable structures are removed from the slopes of these mountains from rock fall or landslide hazards by Project open space buffers. Buildings are proposed to be located 250 feet south of slope of Coral Mountain. A 301.2-acre buffer area of undisturbed natural lands is proposed at the southern portion of the Project, separating the proposed residential and resort areas from the slopes of the Martinez Rockslide by approximately 950 feet. Additionally, the slopes of the surrounding mountains do not contain dense vegetation that would result in wildfires, and potentially associated landslides. Therefore, the proposed Project, and the development area within the Project would not be impacted by wildfires and post -fire slope instabilities. 4.19.5 Cumulative Impacts Buildout of the La Quinta General Plan area would result in the development of urban areas throughout the City. Due to the City's location near undeveloped natural areas, buildout of the City would result in the development of communities encroaching on areas considered as wildlands, or lands within the wildlands/urban interface (WUI). People and man-made structures in WUI areas may be more susceptible to the impacts of wildfires; however, due to the lack of dense vegetation growth and rocky slope conditions in the undeveloped areas (including the areas near and at the Project) the risk of wildfires is considered low. Additionally, per the LQGP, the urban areas of the City are not considered susceptible to wildfire due to their developed character and location away from wildland areas. As stated in threshold discussion d., above, the Travertine development will not develop areas immediately adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain or Martinez Rockslide. The developmental area would occur approximately 250 feet south of Coral Mountain and 950 feet north of Martinez Rockslide. The proposed separation from the slopes and the development area, as well as the implementation of defensible space further reduces the already low risk of wildfires at the Project Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-25 October 2023 763 4.19 WILDFIRE site. Additionally, water infrastructure will be constructed in compliance with City, CVWD, and La Quinta Fire Department standards. Future development within the City that are located adjacent to wildland areas would be required to adhere to developmental standards and implement mitigation as well. Sufficient water infrastructure, emergency service access, and supporting infrastructure will be implemented in Project design and future projects within the City to meet State and local regulations. Cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Project and future buildout of the City related to wildfires are not anticipated to be considerable. Any new development or redevelopment would be required to comply with minimum standards for materials and material assemblies to provide a reasonable level of exterior wildfire exposure protection for buildings in wildland-urban interface areas as required by the California Fire Code. Additionally, the LQGP states that the City shall conduct long-range fire safety planning, including enforcement of stringent building, fire, subdivision and other Municipal Code Standards, improved infrastructure, and mutual aid agreements with other public agencies and the private sector. Project impacts associated with wildfires will not be cumulatively considerable with compliance with policies and regulations, in conjunction with the proposed supporting infrastructure at the Travertine property. 4.19.6 Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. 4.19.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation Mitigation is not required. Impacts of fires will be less than significant. 4.19.8 References 1. City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Plan, Part I: Basic Plan, May 2010, available at http://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showdocument?id=12446 2. Conservation Practice Specifications, Fuel Break - Code 383, Natural Resources Conservation Service, available at https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/CO/CO383 Spec.pdf 3. Imperial Irrigation District SB 901 Wildfire Mitigation Plan 2020 — 2022, September 2019, available at https://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=17951 4. La Quinta General Plan, Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards, available at https://laglaserweb.laguintaca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=561914&dbid=1&repo=CityofL aQuinta&cr=1 5. National Weather Service "Post Wildfire Flash Flood and Debris Flow Guide", https://streetsla.lacity.org/sites/default/files/DebrisFIowSurvivaIGuide.pdf Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-26 October 2023 764 4.19 WILDFIRE 6. Post -Fire Flooding and Debris Flow, USGS California Water Science Center, available at https://www.usgs.gov/centers/ca-water/science/post-fire-flooding-and-debris-flow?qt- science center objects=0#qt-science center objects) Travertine Draft EIR 4.19-27 October 2023 765 Page intentionally blank 766 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 5.0 Other CEQA Sections 5.0 Other CEQA Sections 5.1 Purpose This chapter of the Draft EIR addresses the additional content requirements of the State CEQA Guidelines that are not included in other chapters. CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require a section of the EIR to discuss the significant unavoidable impacts, the significant irreversible impacts, and the growth -inducing impacts (per Public Resources Code Sections 21100(b)(2), 21100(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2) of the project. These topics are discussed in this chapter. 5.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Accordingly, this section provides a summary of significant environmental impacts of the proposed Project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. Project Analysis Per the analysis in Sections 4.1 through 4.19 of this Draft EIR, the Project would result in significant and unavoidable air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation impacts. A brief discussion of the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts anticipated is provided below. Air Quality A Project -specific Air Quality Impact Analysis ("AQIA") was prepared by Urban Crossroads in January 2021 in order to analyze short-term construction and long-term operational impacts of the Project to air quality. An AQ and GHG Memorandum ("Memorandum") was prepared in January 2023, also by Urban Crossroads, in part to ascertain operational emissions using the more current version of CaIEEMod (Version 2022.1). Section 4.3, Air Quality, of this Draft EIR summarizes and analyzes the findings within the AQIA and Memorandum. Section 4.3 determined that air quality impacts during construction of the Project were reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and impacts to air quality during Phase 1 operational activities would be less than significant. However, the evaluation of project buildout concluded that the project would exceed the applicable SCAQMD regional threshold for operational -source activity for emissions of VOCs during Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the Project. The majority of VOC emissions are derived from consumer products and mobile sources (i.e., vehicles). The Draft EIR requires the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, prompting the applicant to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445 (Wood -Burning Devices) by prohibiting the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in the proposed new development. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the emissions of particulate matter from woodburning devices for the reduction of VOCs. Although MM AQ-2 would employ the available Travertine Draft EIR 5-1 October 2023 767 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS compliance measure to help reduce the contribution of VOCs associated with the project, this measure would not result in a numeric reduction capable of off -setting the primary sources of VOCs associated with the project. Specifically, please see the discussion of Transportation impacts below. Neither the project applicant nor the Lead Agency (City) can substantively or materially affect reductions in project mobile -source emissions beyond the regulatory requirements and mitigation measures defined in the technical reports and Section 4.3 of this Draft EIR. Thus, these emissions are considered significant and unavoidable. See Section 4.3, Air Quality, for analysis of these impacts. Greenhouse Gas Emissions A Project -specific Greenhouse Gas Analysis ("GHGA") was prepared by Urban Crossroads in January 2021 in order to analyze short-term construction and long-term operational impacts of the proposed Travertine development to greenhouse gases. Urban Crossroads also prepared an AQ and GHG Memorandum ("Memorandum") in January 2023 to ascertain operational emissions using the more current version of CalEEMod (Version 2022.1). As discussed in greater detail in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project is consistent with applicable plans and policies of the City of La Quinta's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. However, when compared to a quantitative greenhouse gas emissions significance threshold adopted by SCAQMD, the increase in GHG emissions associated with the Project is potentially significant. Specifically, the Project would result in 5.05 MTCO2e per SP per year, thus exceeding the SCAQMD and City's screening threshold of 2.41 MTCO2e per SP per year (see Table 4.8-3, Project GHG Emissions Summary Amortized Construction and Annual Operational Emissions, in Section 4.8 of this Draft EIR). In 2045, the total GHG emissions from the Project would translate to 4.39 MTCO2e/SP/yr., which would exceed the applicable threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP/yr. Thus, the proposed Project is anticipated to result in annual CO2e emissions that exceed the most conservative threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP/yr. This threshold is based on a linear interpolation between the 2020 target of 4.8 MTCO2e/yr. and the 2045 target of 0.72 MTCO2e/yr. As such, the Project's target for per capita GHG efficiency in 2045 is 0.72 MTCO2e/yr. Thus, Project - related emissions are potentially significant. Therefore, the DEIR recommends that the Project applicant purchase a minimum of approximately 408,720 MTCO2e credits (approximately 13,624 MTCO2e per year for 30 years) prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, as well as submit a GHG reduction plan to the City for approval. The GHG plan must include enforceable actions that reduce GHG emissions to at or below the total mitigated values (see Mitigation Measure GHG-1 in Section 4.8). Additional mitigation measures that will reduce GHG emissions include the installation of: roof- top solar panels, in -home batteries and EV charger stations, electrical circuits for electric ready - homes, dedicated circuits and panels to convert natural gas to electric in the future, EV charging stations in non-residential components, energy efficient household appliances, and water -efficient landscaping and fixtures (Mitigation Measures GHG-2 through GHG-11). With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-12, Project -related GHG emissions are reduced to 0.71 MTCO2e/SP/yr. in 2045, which is less than the applicable threshold of 0.72 MTCO2e/SP/yr. Based on the calculations, if the Project pursued the 2045 target of 0.72 MTCO2e/yr., the Project would require Travertine Draft EIR 5-2 October 2023 768 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS approximately 13,624 credit per year to reach the efficiency level. The 13,624 credits would reduce the total annual emissions from 16,251.07 MTCO2e/yr., to approximately 2,664, which, when divided by the service population of 3,700, would achieve the target of 0.71 MTCO2e/yr. Nevertheless, because the use of carbon credits have not been broadly adopted in the Coachella Valley to mitigate GHG emissions impacts of residential and resort communities, the City has conservatively assumed that the Project will have a significant and unavoidable impact on GHG emissions. See Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, for analysis of these impacts. Transportation The Project -specific Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads (Appendix M.2), and Section 4.16, Transportation, of this Draft EIR analyzes the VMT impact as a result of the Project. The City of La Quinta's guidelines were utilized to determine the Project travel demand of VMT, pursuant to CEQA (transportation) threshold topic b. Using the City's guidelines, the VMT Analysis concluded that the Project's non-residential uses do not exceed VMT thresholds, however, the Project's residential uses would exceed the VMT thresholds and result in a potential impact. Per the VMT Analysis, the Project would generate an estimated 3,250 residents, 250 employees, and 200 resort occupants, for a total service population of 3,700. For baseline conditions, the residential portion of the Project would generate 48,508 Home -Based VMT. The result is approximately 14.93 home -based VMT/Capita for the 2020 Baseline with Project conditions (48,508 divided by 3,250). The estimates of baseline residential home -based Project VMT/Capita were compared to the City of La Quinta VMT of 12.98 home -based VMT/Capita. The City of La Quinta guidelines indicate that residential VMT exceeding 15 percent below the Citywide VMT per resident (11.03 VMT/Capita) represents a project impact. The Project home -based VMT/Capita of 14.93 is greater than the City VMT/Capita threshold, and therefore, is a potentially significant VMT impact. The Project incorporates design features and attributes promoting trip reduction. Because these features/attributes are integral to the Project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they are not considered to be mitigation measures. However, the RIVTAM data input methodology does not include the ability to account for these trip reduction features that are built into the project. Therefore, reductions related to these project design features are considered after the VMT data is extracted from the traffic model. In particular, Project transportation impacts are reduced by the following Project design features/attributes, which are anticipated to collectively reduce Project home -based VMT by approximately 3%: • Having different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport. For example, when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as resort land uses, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her recreational needs. The Travertine Draft EIR 5-3 October 2023 769 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS Project will implement marketing strategies to optimize interaction between on -site resort and residential uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip reduction strategies. Marketing strategies may include: • Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities • Event promotions • Publications • The Project's mix of resort and residential uses could provide for a potential reduction in Project residential VMT of 2%. • The Project includes sidewalk connections and would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The Project's implementation of this measure could provide for a potential reduction in Project residential VMT of 1%. The VMT reduction achieved by the implementation of Project design features/attributes is anticipated to be approximately 3%. This would result in a Project Residential VMT of 12.59 which is more than the City's VMT residential threshold of 11.03 VMT per resident and a potentially significant VMT impact. In summary, travel demand modeling of VMT for the Project based upon City of La Quinta guidelines indicates a potential impact for residential uses while also indicating the Project's non-residential uses do not exceed VMT thresholds. Project design features taken into account after the modeling process reduce home -based VMT from 14.93 VMT/resident to 12.59. However, the estimated 12.59 home - based VMT per resident is more than the City's VMT residential threshold and a VMT impact. Therefore, a significant unavoidable adverse impact related to Residential VMT has been identified. 5.3 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes An analysis of irreversible environmental changes is required in an EIR for the amendment of a local plan. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15127.) Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2 (d), uses of nonrenewable resources during construction and operation of the Project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as a highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with a project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified. The irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources is the permanent loss of resources for future or alternative purposes. Irreversible and irretrievable resources are those that cannot be recovered or recycled or those that are consumed or reduced to unrecoverable forms. Travertine Draft EIR 5-4 October 2023 770 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS Project Analysis The Project would result in moderate irreversible and irretrievable commitments of energy and material resources (during construction and operation) of the following: • Construction materials • Energy in the form of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum • Land area committed to the project; and • Water supply for project operation Construction materials: Development of the Project will result in the use of construction materials and resources. The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) applies to all cities in California, and mandates that all new building construction develop a waste management plan that includes diversion of at least 65% of construction and demolition material from landfills, through recycling and/or reuse. The Project will be required to comply with applicable solid waste regulations to ensure that the Project does not result in the inefficient use of materials during construction of the Project (see Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems). Energy in the form of electricity, natural pas, and petroleum: The use of these nonrenewable resources is expected to account for a minimal portion of the region's resources and would not affect the availability of these resources for other needs within the region. Construction activities would not result in inefficient use of energy or natural resources. As determined in Section 4.6, Energy Resources, during construction of the Project, electricity would be consumed to supply and convey water for dust control and may be used to power lighting, and electronic equipment. Electricity consumption during construction of the site is anticipated to be minimal and within the infrastructure service capabilities of IID. Additionally, when not in use, electric equipment would be powered off so as to avoid unnecessary energy consumption. Natural gas consumption is not anticipated to be required during construction of the Project, therefore, would not result in inefficient use of energy resources. Petroleum fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction, while vehicle miles traveled (VMT) associated with the transportation of construction materials and construction worker commutes would also result in petroleum consumption. However, to assist in reducing construction - related gasoline consumption at the Project site, Mitigation Measure AQ-2, provided in Section 4.3, Air Quality, require that that during construction activities, off -road diesel construction equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, complies with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 off -road emissions standards or equivalent and shall ensure that all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. The use of Tier 4 engines during Project construction would assist in Travertine Draft EIR 5-5 October 2023 771 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS reducing construction -related petroleum consumption at the Project site, and Project construction would not consume petroleum in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Additionally, long-term operations would not result in inefficient consumption of energy and natural resources. Operation of the Project would result in the consumption of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum use during the life of the Project. As determined in Section 4.6, Energy Resources, the Project would implement energy conservation measures and project design features compliant with State regulations such as Title 24 and CALGreen requirements related to energy efficiency. Implementing rooftop solar and energy -efficient design features will both generate electricity onsite, and reduce electricity consumption, respectively. The Project will utilize water efficient plumbing fixtures, light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes, drought tolerant plants, and water efficient irrigation systems. The Project will also install Energy Star appliances and tankless water heater systems. In order to reduce Project -related VMTs and petroleum consumption, the Project will be designed to include a transportation system that appeals to motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. These Project features reduce Project -related energy consumption, avoiding the inefficient consumption of energy during Project operation. See Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for a list of the project design features. Land area committed to the project: As discussed in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, the Project property was part of a land exchange between BLM and the Nature Conservancy to dispose of public lands that would be more suitable for development in exchange for private land further to the south that provides important habitat for bighorn sheep. The City of La Quinta approved the development of a mixed -use residential project on the site in 1995 (1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan). This project proposes to amend the previously approved specific plan to further reduce the development footprint and dwelling density, eliminate the previously proposed 36-hole golf course in exchange for a smaller golf training and practice facility and preserve 301.2 acres of natural open space. The Project property boundaries encompass approximately 855 acres of vacant and undeveloped land. The Project property is surrounded by undeveloped land to the north, west and south. Project construction will result in the change of the physical environment. Project development is proposed to permanently impact 553.14 acres, and result in temporary impacts to approximately 123.6 acres of the Project site. Approximately 301 acres in the southern portion of the Project property will be maintained as permanent natural open space. Apart from the proposed water tanks in the southeast corner, development would not occur within the area designated for natural open space. The Project is identified as a covered action in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) and will be required to pay fees to assure the off -site conservation of habitat lands for sensitive species covered by the CVMSHCP. The land area committed to the project has been reduced and optimized over time to minimally impact natural resources while facilitating attainment of the City's housing objectives. For the above reasons, the land area committed to the Travertine Draft EIR 5-6 October 2023 772 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS Project is not expected to result in the loss of irretrievable biological resources. Additionally, Section 4.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EIR requires the Project to implement Mitigation Measures B1O-1 through BIO-37 to reduce impacts to biological resources to less than significant levels. See Section 4.4 for an in-depth analysis and list of mitigation measures. Water supply for project operation Construction and operation of the proposed Project will generate demand for water resources. According to the Project -specific Water Supply Assessment (WSA), the total Project water demand is projected to be 867.47 acre-feet per year (AFY). As a standard requirement by the City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), the Project will implement water conservation methods to assure the most efficient use of water resources and to meet and maintain the goals of the Coachella Valley Urban Water Management Plan throughout the life of the Project. The water conservation methods include using native plant materials and drought tolerant plants, and recycled water (if it becomes available to the Project). The Project will also install and maintain efficient on - site irrigation systems to minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize effective watering of plant roots via drip irrigation; install low -flush toilets and water conserving showerheads; as well as pay groundwater replenishment fees to the CVWD. The proposed Project will reduce water demand compared to the existing approved 1995 Specific Plan since the proposed Project reduces the total currently approved land use. The 1995 Specific Plan included the development of 2,300 low density residential homes (1,100 more dwellings than the Project), 10 acres of commercial uses; a 500-room resort hotel (400 more rooms than the proposed Project) with amenities; 36-hole golf course (approximately 24 to 30 more holes than the Project); tennis club; and private recreation in individual developments. The 1995 Specific Plan would result in triple the amount of water demand compared to the proposed Project. Water demand to support the 500-room resort, the 2,300 residential dwelling units, and the 36-hole golf course would result in a greater water consumption, compared to the proposed Project, which would consume approximately 867.47 AFY. The Project will conform to the requirements of CVWD's programs and requirements pertaining to water management and conservation. This is discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems. In summary, although the proposed Project will result commitment of resources and potentially significant and unavoidable operational noise, air quality and transportation impacts, the Project is consistent with the City's noise ordinance and General Plan, and with the implementation of mitigation measures and project design features, as well as through compliance with State and local regulations and conservation guidelines, will reduce impacts to construction materials, energy resources, biological resources, and water supply to less than significant levels. See Section 4.6, Energy Resources, Section 4.4, Biological Resources, Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR for further discussion. Travertine Draft EIR 5-7 October 2023 773 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS 5.4 Growth -Inducing Impacts Per Section 15126.2 (e), the EIR shall discuss the ways in which the Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth. Increases in the population may tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. An EIR should also discuss the characteristics of the project under review which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. Project Analysis As stated throughout this Draft EIR, the Project is currently included in a previously approved specific plan, Travertine and Green Specific Plan. The Travertine and Green Specific Plan was approved in 1995 and the Travertine portion proposed 2,300 residential dwelling units, golf courses, and commercial uses on 909 acres. The Travertine site is currently vacant with undeveloped and developed uses onsite. The Project being evaluated in this Draft EIR proposes a reduction in Specific Plan acreage compared the 1995 approved Specific Plan, from 909 acres to 855 acres. In 1995 an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the 1995 Specific Plan, which analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the development of the 1995 Specific Plan. The 1995 EIR was prepared as a "programmatic" EIR and required additional technical reports to be completed and mitigation measures implemented prior to or concurrent with the development of the 1995 Specific Plan. The additional technical reports and surveys completed after the approval of the 1995 Specific Plan determined that cultural, paleontological, and biological resources occur onsite (see Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for additional discussion of Project history). In order to address potential impacts to cultural, paleontological, and biological resources, the Project reduced the property acreage from 909 acres to 855 acres. Within the 855-acre property, the development area is 553.14 acres, and approximately 301 acres is reserved for natural open space in the southern portion of the Project property. Apart from the development of two water tanks and associated infrastructure, no development will occur in the natural open space area. The preservation of cultural, paleontological, and biological resources (resulting in a reduced development area), as well as changes to market demand resulted in land use and property size modifications to the Project property, compared to the approved 1995 Specific Plan. The modified Project proposes up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying product types, a resort/spa facility with 100 villas, recreational uses such as a golf facility featuring a clubhouse, multiple neighborhood parks, a public trail system, recreational open space, and natural open space for conservation. As previously Travertine Draft EIR 5-8 October 2023 774 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS stated, the Project property is currently located within the boundaries of the approved 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan, which proposed a more intense, golf course -oriented community. Therefore, the Applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment; a Zone Change; a Specific Plan Amendment; a Tentative Tract Map; and Development Agreement to allow the uses proposed in the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment and analyzed in this Draft EIR. As described throughout this Draft EIR, the Project could result in approximately 3,250 new residents to the City based on estimates generated by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in the VMT Analysis (Appendix M.2). Consistent with historic modeling of the Travertine project, the VMT Analysis utilized 2.8 persons per household (pph) for single family detached homes and 2.6 pph for duplex residential units. This results in an overall project average of 2.71 pph, which is higher than the SCAG RTP estimates for the City of La Quinta (2.57 persons per household in 2012, and 2.50 pph in 2040), resulting in 3,250 residents and a conservative analysis. The VMT Analysis also estimates that the Project would result in 250 employees from the operation of the resort facilities, and 200 temporary resort/hotel occupants. The 200 temporary hotel occupants include the 2 guests per room of the 100- room resort. The employment estimates have been developed from land use to employment generation factors from the Riverside County General Plan but modified for the specific Project characteristics and then confirmed with the applicant. Although the Project employment is a mix of employment types, the City of La Quinta guidelines are explicit in indicating that the hotel land uses are categorized as retail uses. Thus, the service population generated by the Project is 3,700 people. The 100-room resort will not lead to permanent residents, however, the resort hotel, and golf components of the Project would induce growth in employment opportunities required for the operation of the resort and resort/golf portion of the Project property. However, the Project will not result in a large employment base, and jobs created at the Project will be absorbed by new and existing residents of the City and surrounding jurisdictions. According to the City of La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR), the City will have a population of 46,297 people by 2035 (buildout of the City). The California Department of Finance (DOF) population and housing estimates that the City of La Quinta had a total population of approximately 37,860 people in 2022. Utilizing the VMT Evaluation's service population figure, the population anticipated from total buildout would equate to 3,250 new residents, for an approximate population of 41,110 in the City by 2035. This is an increase of approximately 8.6 percent, and still below the projected City's 2035 population forecast of 46,297 people. This is conservative because it assumes that the new residents of the Project do not currently live in La Quinta. Although the Project would contribute to growth within the City of La Quinta, significant growth to population, housing and employment is already anticipated in the City's General Plan, and the Project is consistent with that planned future growth projected for buildout of the City, including based upon the existing entitlement approvals for the Project site. The Project site is currently entitled to include 2,300 low -density residential housing units, two golf courses, tennis courts and recreational facilities, Travertine Draft EIR 5-9 October 2023 775 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS open space, and commercial uses. Using the same person per household value utilized in the VMT Analysis, the existing entitled property would generate approximately 6,440 new residents (2,300 dwelling units x 2.8 pph for single family homes). This is approximately 3,190 more residents than the proposed Project. Both the previously approved Specific Plan and the proposed Project would result in employment opportunities with the proposed resort, golf, and recreational amenities. However, the approved Specific Plan proposed 10 acres of commercial uses, a 500-room resort hotel (400 more rooms than the proposed Project) with amenities, 36-hole golf course (approximately 24 to 30 more holes than the Project), and a tennis club. The approved Specific Plan proposed more resort rooms and recreational amenities as compared to the proposed Project. Thus, the approved Specific Plan would result in more employment opportunities than the proposed Project. As previously stated, the proposed Project would generate temporary resort hotel guests (200 people) and approximately 250 employees. Similar to the proposed Project, development and operation of the previously entitled Project would induce growth in employment, as generated by the golf courses, the 500-room hotel, and commercial uses. It is likely that jobs generated by the Project could be filled by La Quinta residents. The City of La Quinta General Plan EIR forecasts that the City will have 21,678 jobs by 2035. According to the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) Local Profile Report for La Quinta, the City of had a total of 16,848 jobs in 2017. The proposed Project would generate 250 jobs, which would result in approximately 17,098 jobs in La Quinta. The Project would represent 1.5 percent of the projected jobs in the City. Therefore, the City anticipates the growth of employment in the City and the Project is consistent with that planned future growth. The Project proposes the westerly extension of Avenue 62 and the development of Jefferson Street north of the Project. Due to the Project's location, situated in the southern -most portion of La Quinta, the westerly extension would not result in the potential increase of new development or housing growth in the surrounding area, unrelated to the Project. The extension of Avenue 62 would result in access to the site and will not result in growth in the area (separate from the Project), since the Project property is secluded and is isolated between flood control and groundwater management facilities and public lands. The development of Jefferson Street on the Project site would construct the Project's northern access point. The southern -most extent of Jefferson Street ends at The Quarry, approximately one mile north of the Guadalupe Dike. The Project proposes Jefferson Street to be developed within the Project site. The Project will partially develop the segment of Jefferson Street extending south of The Quarry to cross the Guadalupe Dike and connect to the northern Project boundary in order to provide access to the property. The connection of Jefferson Street to the City's circulation network is proposed to be complete with the development of the entitled property north of the Project, which while not currently developed, is planned to support residential development as it is designated as Low Density Residential, per the La Quinta Land Use Map, and could be developed in the future. The extension of Jefferson Street is not anticipated to result in unexpected direct or indirect growth in the City, since buildout of Jefferson Street is anticipated in the La Quinta General Plan. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant. The increase of new development in the Travertine Draft EIR 5-10 October 2023 776 5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS surrounding area, not related to the proposed Project, as a result of the road extensions would be minimal since the Project is located in a secluded area in the City, isolated between flood control and groundwater management facilities and public lands. The Project will also develop an off -site utility field which will include five well sites, and one, 2.5-acre substation. The off -site utility field is proposed to be located within 2 miles of the site, generally north and east of the Project, and as is discussed through the EIR, is not anticipated to result in potentially significant impacts. The precise location and design of the wells and supporting infrastructure (i.e., fences, walls, or gates) would be subject to approval by CVWD. Project -level environmental review of these facilities will be undertaken as appropriate by CVWD in their role as a CEQA responsible agency. As previously stated, the wells are proposed to serve the Project site, as well as the region, thereby indirectly facilitating growth in the area. An offsite 2.5-acre substation will be required for the Project and will be constructed during the Construction Phase 1 stage. All off -site parcels required for the substation will be chosen to fit the requirements of IID and will be studied with metrics provided by the utility. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed Project shall be installed underground. Power lines with voltage higher than 92 kV are exempt from being installed underground and will likely connect the new substation to any existing substation along public rights -of -way. Any unique conditions not covered by this Draft EIR would be covered supplementary to this document. The precise location and design of the substation and associated infrastructure would be subject to approval by IID in their role as a CEQA responsible agency. The off -site substation would provide additional electrical infrastructure to the City of La Quinta, potentially resulting in indirect growth in the City and surrounding area. The substation will improve the reliability of the system for existing users in the vicinity. Future development is not yet known, and therefore an analysis of such development would be speculative at this time. However, any future development will be reviewed by IID and the City and conditioned in accordance with CEQA and laws and regulations applicable to IID and the City. Water lines will be extended south from Madison Street and west from Avenue 62 to the Project site. Sewer lines will be extended west from Avenue 62 and Monroe Street to the Project site. The Project is not anticipated to result in an indirect growth inducing impact because the existing infrastructure has been sized to accommodate long term growth by the applicable providers and because the projected population growth is already anticipated in the City of La Quinta's General Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to substantial population or housing growth unexpected by the City of La Quinta, and growth inducing impacts will be less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 5-11 October 2023 777 Page intentionally blank 778 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 6.0 Effects Found to have No Impact Chapter 6.0 Effects Found to have No Impact As discussed in Chapter 1.0, Executive Summary, the City of La Quinta (City) is the lead agency for the planning and environmental review of the proposed Project. The City has prepared this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, including Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines which requires a brief description of any possible significant effects that were determined to have no impacts and were not analyzed in detail within the environmental analysis. Therefore, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines, this chapter, Effects Found to have No Impact, is included in this Draft EIR. Chapter 4 contains a complete analysis of all impacts which the NOP determined may have an effect on the environment. The analysis in this section was conducted consistent with and informed by the 2023 CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist. The following discussion presents the analysis of the effects related to mineral resources that were determined to have no potential to impact the environment. 6.1 Mineral Resources Threshold a: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Threshold b: Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The Coachella Valley contains valued mineral resources due to the region's highly active geologic nature. The numerous earthquake faults throughout the region create massive uplifting and folding of the land and expose mineral resources on the surface. Mineral resources found throughout the region include sand, gravel, crushed stone, copper, limestone, and tungsten. Many of these resources are important for common construction projects including asphalt, concrete, road base, stucco, and plaster. Sand and gravel have been transported by wind and rain into the Valley from surrounding mountains over millennia. California requires that mineral resources be identified and that the mining of identified resources be protected. The California Department of Conservation, Divisions of Mines and Geology has mapped the region's resources and identified three Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) in the City, established as MRZ-1, MRZ-2, and MRZ-3 under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands. MRZ-1 mapped areas are lands where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood for their presence exists. In the City of La Quinta, MRZ-1 areas encompass areas Travertine Draft EIR 6-1 October 2023 779 6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT north and west of the City. MRZ-2 mapped areas are lands where geologic data show that significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 is divided on the basis of both degree or knowledge and economic factors. Areas classified as MRZ-2a contain discovered mineral deposits that are either measured or indicated reserves as determined by such evidence as drilling records, sample analysis, surface exposure, and mine information. Land included in MRZ-2a category is of prime importance because it contains known economic mineral deposits. MRZ-2b areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic information indicates that significant inferred resources are present. Areas classified by MRZ-2b contain discovered deposits that are either inferred reserves or deposits that are presently sub -economic as determined by limited sample analysis, exposure, and past mining history. There is only one area of the City where the potential for mineral resources occurs. This area is located northwest of the project site and was previously a quarry site. However, this area was developed as a country club community (the Quarry La Quinta. Mineral resources are no longer mined at this location. MRZ-3a mapped lands are areas containing known mineral deposits that may qualify as mineral resources. MRZ-3b mapped lands are areas containing inferred mineral deposits that may qualify as mineral resources. The City of La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) mapping of mineral resources is consistent with that of the California Department of Conservation. Under the City of La Quinta General Plan, MRZ-3 mapped areas are lands where the significance of mineral deposits are undetermined. MRZ-3 areas occupy the western and southern areas of the City of La Quinta. According to Figure OS-6 of the City of La Quinta County General Plan, the project site is located in an MRZ-3 area. Lands that fall under the MRZ-3 designation make up a small portion of La Quinta. The MRZ-3 designation is found only in the southwestern portion of the City, including along the Coral Reef Mountains and within the Cove area. Aside from the development that already exists within the Cove, the majority of land in the MRZ-3 zone is designated as open space. The Open Space designation does not permit mining activities and requires the land to be preserved in its natural state. The project site is undeveloped and disturbed, vacant land designated for low density residential and golf course development. The La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR) states that undeveloped sites located in MRZ-3 zones in the City are surrounded by urban development and mineral extraction activities are incompatible and unlikely on the remaining vacant parcels. The project site is currently designated for residential and golf course uses, and has been since the 1995 Travertine and Green Specific Plan. Therefore, the LQGP EIR concludes that development of areas within these land use categories will not result in the loss of availability of locally important mineral resource considered valuable to the region and state and does not result in the loss of availability of mineral resource recovery sites. The project site is not recognized as a mineral resource recovery site delineated in the City of LQGP, General Plan EIR or resource maps prepared pursuant to SMARA. The land has for many years been designated for residential and golf course development, and not for mineral extraction. Therefore, the Travertine Draft EIR 6-2 October 2023 780 6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state, and will not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. For the above reasons, the proposed project will not result in impacts to mineral resources. Travertine Draft EIR 6-3 October 2023 781 Page intentionally blank 782 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta, CA 7.0 Alternatives Chapter 7.0 Alternatives 7.1 Introduction An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or substantially lessening any of the significant environmental impacts of the Project. An EIR must include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed project. An EIR must also briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed, and any alternatives that were considered that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination. This section identifies and describes alternatives considered but rejected as infeasible during scoping, process, the approach to selecting alternatives for discussions, the alternatives to the proposed Project that were carried forward for analysis in the EIR, evaluates the merits of those alternatives relative to the proposed project, and identifies an environmentally superior alternative as required by CEQA. Key provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6) relating to this alternative's analysis are summarized by the following: • The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which would feasibly attain most of the project objectives and are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project. • The No Project Alternative shall be evaluated along with its impacts. The No Project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions. • Additionally, the analysis shall discuss what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project is not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure. This is analyzed in the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative. • The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a "rule of reason" that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that could feasibly avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. CEQA does not require an analysis of alternative sites in all cases. The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a rule of reason that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(f)(2)(c) provides that where a previous document has sufficiently analyzed a range of reasonable alternative locations and environmental impacts for projects with the same basic purpose, the EIR may rely on the previous document to help it assess the feasibility Travertine Draft EIR 7-1 October 2023 783 7.0 ALTERNATIVES of potential project alternatives to the extent the circumstances remain substantially the same as they relate to the alternative. Only feasible alternative locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need to be considered for the inclusion in the EIR. However, if the lead agency concludes that no potentially feasible alternative locations exist, it must disclose the reasons for this conclusion in the EIR. • Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent). No one of these factors establishes a fixed limit on the scope of reasonable alternatives. • An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative. Rationale for Selecting Alternatives The City identified alternatives for consideration based on their ability to reduce or avoid the Project's potentially significant and unavoidable transportation (VMT), air quality and greenhouse gas emissions impacts while meeting the majority of the proposed project's objectives and deliver additional housing stock. Of those alternatives, only those alternatives that are potentially feasible, meet the majority of the proposed Project's objectives, and could avoid the proposed Project's potentially significant environmental impacts were carried forward for analysis in the EIR. 7.2 Alternatives Considered and Rejected State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) requires an EIR to identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process, and to briefly explain the reasons underlying the agency's determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in the EIR are failure to meet most of the project objectives, infeasibility, or inability to avoid significant environmental impacts. This section identifies the alternatives considered but rejected as infeasible. Alternative Location Alternative locations capable of reducing any of the Project's potentially significant environmental impacts or that could meet the majority of the Project's objectives were not identified. The Project site is consistent with the City's land use development vision and has been designated for low density residential and open space uses since adoption of the 1995 Specific Plan. Notably, the La Quinta General Plan EIR considered an alternative involving concentrated population centers near Travertine Draft EIR 7-2 October 2023 784 7.0 ALTERNATIVES commercial and public land uses, in order to reduce potential traffic and air quality impacts (Alternative 2). Under this alternative, lands immediately south of Saint Francis Catholic Church would be developed at Medium/High Density Residential intensities, as would all the lands in the north Sphere of Influence. In addition, this alternative analyzed Medium/High Density lands in the eastern Sphere, adjacent to and west of the industrial and commercial lands along Harrison Street, and east of the commercial lands on the east side of Monroe. Medium/High Density Residential lands would also occur at the southeast corner of Airport Boulevard and Monroe. This alternative was found to result in greater GHG emissions and Air Quality impacts than the adopted General Plan, which contemplates a lower level of residential development. In addition to the foregoing, an alternative location was determined to be infeasible because the Project applicant does not own or control any other properties in the area that are suitable for a master -planned mixed -use or residential development. Additional Commercial Retail Alternative Another alternative considered and rejected included the addition of more commercial retail components and square footage on the Project property. This alternative proposed 162.1 acres of commercial uses, as well as 55.9 acres for open space recreation, 301.2 acres for open space natural uses, and 301.2 acres for residential. This alternative was considered because it would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) to less than significant levels by providing commercial uses to the existing and future residential communities north, east, and southeast of the Project site, and future residents within the Project boundaries. However, this alternative was rejected because it would result in greater impacts to air quality and greater greenhouse gas emissions than those generated by the proposed Project, therefore translating to significant and unavoidable impacts in the said categories. Additionally, off -site noise impacts would increase due to the increased traffic to the proposed Project by existing residents in the surrounding communities that would access the commercial retail uses within the Project site. This alternative would meet Project objectives to a lesser degree than the proposed Project by reducing the number of residential dwelling units proposed for the Project. Notably, the developable area on the property has been constrained in order to reduce impacts to biological and cultural resources, thus limiting the applicant's ability to increase both residential and commercial uses. Accordingly, under the Additional Commercial Retail Alternative, the increase in commercial square footage would be at the expense of residential square footage. Additionally, considering the Project's distance to more intense land uses, the marketability of the property for commercial uses is greatly decreased. The density associated with edge communities (number of "rooftops") does not normally support standard neighborhood commercial development. Travertine Draft EIR 7-3 October 2023 785 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 7.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project The following alternatives were selected for evaluation in this DEIR: 1. Alternative 1— No Project/No Build The project site, under this Alternative, would remain in its current and existing condition as a vacant lot. No development would occur at the site. The existing site character and resources would remain the same and none of the impacts of the Project would occur. This Alternative would result in less impacts than the proposed Project since no development would occur. 2. Alternative 2 — No Project/Originally Approved SP Under this Alternative, the property would be developed under the existing Travertine Specific Plan which was approved in 1995. This Alternative would develop approximately 909 acres consisting of 2,300 dwelling units on 466.6 acres, general commercial uses on 10 acres, tourist commercial uses such as a 500-room resort/hotel a tennis club, private recreation in individual developments on approximately 30.9 acres, open space recreational (36-hole golf course facility) on approximately 365.3 acres, major community facilities on 4.1 acres, and 12.2 acres of open space natural land. Any resources driven by daily vehicle trips and population such as Air Quality, GHG, Energy, Utility and Services would be assumed to double concurrently VMT impacts are not expected to double however they will be greatly increased due to the doubling of residential traffic. Table 7-1 Approved and Proposed Specific Plan Land Use Plan Specific Plan Element Approved Specific Plan Proposed Specific Plan Acreage 909 855 Dwelling Units 2,300 1,200 10 acres of commercial uses Resort 500 room resort/hotel 100 Room Resort and Wellness Spa Golf Training and Practices Facility Golf 36-hole golf course with associated Recreational Commercial Elements Tennis Club Tennis club Tennis club removed Private recreation in individual Private recreation in individual Private Recreation developments developments 358 acres Open Space/Recreational Other Open Space 378 acres of golf course and Restricted Source: Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, Table 1, 2020. Travertine Draft EIR 7-4 October 2023 786 3OJft; '`a-.-4-t e SR@cffF[ Flee, TRL Larba OtmloRrimeM1t,2Q17 Source: TRG Land, Inc. A -CON SULTIN G, I Nill } r%A Fia['.I'4ff. FGIj4Q71.A 5I.{p'�Ei'14d. — A 1995 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN TRAVERTINE EXHI[TI4 7-1 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 3. Alternative 3 - Phase 1 (1A and 1B) Only Under this Alternative, the property would develop Phase 1(1A and 1B) of the project, which includes 600 residential dwelling units on approximately 243.4 acres, a resort/golf facility on approximately 46.2 acres, open space recreational on approximately 35.5 acres, and open space natural uses on approximately 301.2 acres. Under this scenario, the project would be served only by Ave 62 with an emergency vehicular access road along the alignment of Madison Street. This Alternative would not develop the southerly extension of Jefferson Street. The proposed land uses for Alternative 3 are provided in the table below and illustrated in Exhibit 7-2 and 7-3. This Alternative would result in approximately half of Project impacts to air quality, energy, greenhouse gases, since it would not develop phases 2 and 3 (which include half of the proposed residential units as well as the resort spa). Noise would be reduced due to the decreased number of daily vehicles and users onsite. Impacts determined by disturbed and offsite areas, such as Biological and Cultural Resources, would be reduced somewhat due to the reduced acreage, however offsite flood protection facilities will still be required. Table 7-2 Phase 1 (1A and 1113) Only Alternative Land Use and Acreages Phase 1 (1A and 1B) Only Alternative Planning Area Land Use Acres Target Density Target Units Phase 1A 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 2.9 75 11 Resort/Golf 46.2 -- -- 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 2.0 105 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 1.8 48 14 Low Density Residential 39.0 1.7 65 15-A Low Density Residential 20.9 2.1 44 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 -- -- 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 -- -- Phase 1-A Total 534.9 0.6 337 Phase 18 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 1.9 31 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 3.3 61 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 4.3 73 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 4.9 72 15-B Low Density Residential 12.4 2.1 26 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 -- Phase 1-8 Total 93.7 2.8 263 Total 628.6 1.0 600 Travertine Draft EIR 7-6 October 2023 788 eafi& dAbAqNy I ep-7mv Source: TRG Land, Inc. oxi Wwbmu I'll -% NF. I - -x ( niviichnniikam- rA Im" t 5,C AM « ULM�L Ehhk-LC 12 Lo" Uyjrj I% R!�6� %I i I JAJ Max L) I,)-- Umt; LL, K,;Mti" 26:) 1.54A "bc IA ij 111 3 � ntwr i, Hh-- Kkvi a] S9 Ja 11-4-s ,LAY 1.7 fikc MA I -)JA 1)"UL, 1.74-5 Dtbd 21 R—L --U'A 23.1 K 11 EL" 4 II PA - mt Kk —, A oEvkT 5v M-CO SU LTI N G, I N C- PHASE 1A CONSTRUCTION SA. TRAVERTINE f,L!Nrq1mC-m--r%A EXH 191497-2 �X ym :MYON ".YLKQ Source: TRG Land, Inc. 1'IaAkF 1-13 L•r,n:;iucgbmmkri PA/IMI Cl- %rrsr 11MT NNW lr-TK Forpr4 Vriju @Fl1A 5 [�kassl� P.�isi�ial i83 IS•i1'.:�'7k l.y jl I'ArrF%**rPRl--'i&nlkd 107 1 54�ir-c *3 61 1 fAx c;rm iriw mmi4m ibi II�L9 I J-a.5 ttv= k2 'Y. ■ M 71= CL-xn th kvYdcori4 14A A-14.i ileac 50 ai •_kLN liar rffzdr Wco"iilrl IT4 13-4.4dLy4c mi `8 18 k �.7�IL211a 1�7 f'FM+r 7-� t•3AIb � fl CcrML Mov 3r0 y 5 j� =- :ip, F For I A VA �ikk 1 ylaarSP. ��--- 51!� PHASE 1 B CONSTRUCTION I SA. -CON SULTIN G, I N _ TRAVERTINE EXHIB1T07-3 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Evaluation of Alternatives A comparison of the impacts of the project and the alternatives selected for further evaluation is provided in this section for each of the environmental topics addressed in the Draft EIR. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of the environmental effects of the alternatives in an EIR may be less detailed than provided for in the project but should be sufficiently detailed to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the project. The comparative analysis was conducted qualitatively and, for some resources areas, quantitatively using the existing technical analysis prepared for the Project. The existing technical analyses include Urban Crossroad's Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), and VMT Evaluation. Air quality, greenhouse gas, and traffic/VMT, utility and service impacts were quantitatively analyzed utilizing rough percentages of increase or decrease of impacts when compared to the proposed Project. Increases or decreases with respect to greenhouse gases and air quality was based primarily on traffic trips generated which roughly correspond with the number of operational users of the Alternatives. Though Noise and VMT do not directly correlate with traffic trips, they would be expected to increase or decrease to a lesser degree compared with the proposed Project. The findings within the Biological Resources Report, Cultural Report, and Water Supply Assessment were also used as a baseline for the comparative analysis when determining the impacts to development footprint in the Project area. Some of the Project Design Features (PDFs) that are identified in the Project Description section of the EIR were assumed to be implemented for certain alternatives, but not others, primarily because the associated operational commitments cannot be ascertained. Alternative 1 is assumed to not involve any PDFs since no development is involved. Under Alternatives 2 through 3, the applicable PDFs assumed to be incorporated are pedestrian connections and connectivity design with a mixture of land uses, implementation of a Water Conservation Strategy, compliance with Title 24 standards, and waste diversion per AB 939. Alternatives 2 through 3 are assumed to not include market strategies to reduce vehicle trips as these strategies are not part of site design. Market strategies would be related to management of operations or at the discretion of the developer. As a result of implementing some of the Project's PDFs, it is assumed that Alternatives 2 through 3 will achieve a portion of criteria air pollutant, GHG emissions, and VMT reductions attributed to the proposed Project. Water consumption associated with each alternative was determined using water consumption rates (indoor and outdoor) established by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), since the proposed Project is located within CVWD's service area. The water demand associated with the alternatives was determined by categorizing the proposed uses (defined by CVWD), and determined quantitatively using the Project -specific WSA. Travertine Draft EIR 7-9 October 2023 791 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 7.3.1 Alternative 1— No Project / No Build Under the No Project / No Build ("Alternative 1"), the project would remain in its current vacant and undeveloped condition. The site previously operated as a vineyard in the northern portion of the site. The disturbed area includes approximately 220 acres of the project that previously operated as a vineyard. Vineyard operations occupied approximately 220 acres of the site and have been abandoned since 2007 and has remained unused, leaving only trellises and the unutilized utilities. The existing visual character and visual resources would remain the same. Further, impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation would be reduced when compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 1 would not have any significant and unavoidable impacts. A comparative analysis of impacts resulting from Alternative 1 is provided below: Aesthetics Under the No Project / No Build Alternative, the visual character of the Project site, which currently consists of vacant land, would remain the same. The surrounding terrain and mountain ranges provide scenic vistas within La Quinta. Existing man-made structures (i.e., Dike No. 4), landscaping, homes, and public facilities obstruct views of the Project property when viewed from east of Dike No. 4. Alternative 1 does not propose development on the Project property; therefore, the existing scenic vista would not change under the No Project / No Build Alternative, and Alternative 1 would not impact the existing visual character or scenic vista. Additionally, Alternative 1 would not impact scenic resources or create new sources of lighting or glare in the area since development would not occur under this Alternative. Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 1 would result no impacts to aesthetic resources, such as scenic vistas, scenic resources, or generate new sources of light and glare, since the No Project / No Build Alternative would not result in development of the Project site. The proposed Project would not result in potentially significant impacts to aesthetic resources with recommended mitigation measures. Alternative 1 would therefore result in lesser but comparable impacts relative to the proposed Project. Agricultural Resources The subject property is currently vacant. An abandoned vineyard is situated on approximately 220 acres in the northern half of the Project property. The vineyard ceased operation in 2007 and limited inoperable irrigation equipment and trellises remain onsite. This portion of the site is designated as Unique Farmland by the State. Under Alternative 1, no construction would occur on the property, and no impacts to former agricultural resources or other project lands would occur. Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 1 would result in comparable impacts to agricultural resources, as Project impacts are less than significant. Travertine Draft EIR 7-10 October 2023 792 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Air Quality Under Alternative 1, no land development disturbance, construction or operation would occur on the property, resulting in no air emissions. As a vacant site partially modified by prior agricultural operations with unpaved roads, the site would continue to be exposed to seasonal winds capable of resulting in particulate matter emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) under certain conditions. Dust and sand from the site during wind events would continue unregulated. Emissions of other criteria pollutants from an undeveloped Alternative 1 condition would be effectively null and therefore lower than the construction and operational emissions of the proposed Project. Therefore, Alternative 1 would not result in measurable or significant impacts to Air Quality, and therefore lesser Air Quality impacts than the proposed Project. Biological Resources Under Alternative 1, the current state of on -site biological resources would remain unchanged. Under the proposed Project, all impacts to biological resources would be mitigated to below a level of significance. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in lesser or comparable impacts to biological resources relative to the proposed Project. Alternative 1 would therefore avoid all impacts to biological resources and results in lesser impacts to biological resources than the proposed Project. Cultural Resources Under Alternative 1, the property would remain in its current condition. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would not result in impacts to cultural resources. Per the conclusions in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR, the development of the proposed Project may result in impacts to cultural resources. However, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Although the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures, Alternative 1 would avoid all potential impacts. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in lesser but comparable impacts to the proposed Project. Energy Resources Alternative 1 would result in no changes to energy consumption at the Project site. The property would remain vacant and undeveloped. Compared to the proposed Project, the No Project / No Build Alternative would result in lesser impacts to energy resources. Geology and Soils The Project property is currently undeveloped and vacant. The property would remain in its current condition under Alternative 1. The property is not located near an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault zone. Alternative 1 would not result in the development of habitable structures onsite, and no septic Travertine Draft EIR 7-11 October 2023 793 7.0 ALTERNATIVES systems or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed with Alternative 1. No impacts related to loss of topsoil, sedimentation, erosion, and landform alterations associated with the construction of the property is anticipated with the No Project / No Build Alternative. Alternative 1 would not result in impacts associated with geology and soils. Impacts anticipated under the proposed Project are mitigable to less than significant levels. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in lesser but comparable impacts relative to the proposed Project. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Alternative 1 would result in no change in greenhouse gas emissions since no land development disturbance, construction or operation would occur on the property. The proposed Project would result in potentially significant and unavoidable greenhouse gas emissions. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in less GHG impacts relative to the proposed Project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Alternative 1 would result in no changes with respect to hazards and hazardous materials and lands formerly used for agricultural production would remain as they are. Alternative 1 would continue to remain vacant and undeveloped. The proposed Project contemplates remediation of any residual pesticides and would not result in potentially significant impacts with mitigation incorporated. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in lesser but comparable impacts on hazards and hazardous materials relative to the proposed Project. Hydrology and Water Quality Under Alternative 1, the subject property would maintain its current undeveloped condition without incurring in any physical changes. The proposed Project would result in changes to hydrology and water quality, all of which would be mitigated to below a level of significance through project design features and mitigation measures. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in lesser but comparable impacts to the proposed Project. Land Use and Planning The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, Major Community Facilities, and Open Space Recreation land uses, as established by the City of La Quinta. The subject property is currently zoned for Low Density Residential (RL), Medium High Density Residential (RMH), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Tourist Commercial (CT), Golf Course (GC), and Open Space (OS). Under Alternative 1, the project would remain in its current vacant and undeveloped condition. There would be no changes to the site or conflicts with any local, State, or federal land use plan, policy, or regulation. The No Project / No Build Alternative would not impact the existing land use or zoning designations established for the site. Additionally, this Alternative would not divide an established community. No impacts would occur. Travertine Draft EIR 7-12 October 2023 794 7.0 ALTERNATIVES The proposed Project includes various entitlements; however, as determined in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, development pursuant to these entitlements would not result in any conflicts with or significant impacts to any land use plan, policy or regulation. Therefore, neither Alternative 1 nor the proposed Project as mitigated would have a significant impact, or unavoidable impacts on land use and their impacts with respect to land use are comparable. Noise The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. In its existing condition, the property does not contribute to the existing ambient noise environment. The No Project / No Build Alternative would not increase the noise environment or vibration since Alternative 1 does not propose development of the property. Therefore, Alternative 1 would not degrade the noise environment or result in an increase in groundborne vibration to significant levels. Comparatively, the proposed Project would result in increased noise levels at the site and in the area. However, construction -related noise will be less than significant with compliance with the City's construction regulations. Stationary operational noise will also be less than significant. Section 4.12, Noise, determined that future (post -construction) operational noise would also result in less than significant impacts. By comparison, Alternative 1 results in no impacts to the ambient noise environment. Population and Housing Under Alternative 1, no development would occur on the property, and additional residential development would have to be located elsewhere in the City or not all. By comparison, the proposed Project would result in 1,200 new dwelling units and the creation of new employment associated with a 100-room resort hotel, a golf clubhouse and facilities. The proposed Project, however, would not result in an increase in projected population, housing, and employment growth in the City of La Quinta, or the need for unanticipated supporting infrastructure under the La Quinta General Plan. For the above reasons, Alternative 1 and the proposed Project would result in comparable impacts to population and housing. Public Services Under Alternative 1, there would be no development and the site would remain in its current undeveloped state. Therefore, there would be no adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered public facilities nor would Alternative 1 generate a need for new or physically altered facilities, therefore, there would be no environmental impacts associated with providing such facilities. By comparison and as determined in Section 4.14, Public Services, of this Draft EIR, the proposed Project would increase service calls for police and fire services; however, impacts were concluded to Travertine Draft EIR 7-13 October 2023 795 7.0 ALTERNATIVES be less than significant with project design features and mitigation measures. Accordingly, impacts to public services are lesser but comparable under Alternative 1 relative to the proposed Project. Recreation Under Alternative 1, no construction would occur on the property, new recreational facilities would not be developed and no new demand for such facilities would be generated. By comparison, the proposed Project would generate up to 1,200 dwelling units and associated demand for neighborhood and community recreation facilities. The Project would also include a variety of on -site recreational and active and passive open space amenities that will, at least in part, meet the needs of the Project's future residents and visitors. With its inclusion in the Desert Recreation District boundaries and with the payment of development impact fees for parks and open space, the Project will have less than significant impacts on local and regional recreation facilities. Accordingly, impacts to recreation are lesser but comparable under Alternative 1 relative to the proposed Project. Transportation The No Project Alternative would result in no changes to existing transportation patterns. As determined in Section 4.16, the proposed Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in association with proposed Project residential uses. Approval of the proposed Project will require the adoption of a statement of overriding consideration due to Project VMTs. Accordingly, Alternative 1 would result in less impacts than the proposed Project. Tribal Cultural Resources Under Alternative 1, no development of the subject property would occur that could impact Tribal cultural resources, or any feature, place, or cultural landscape that may be interpreted as Tribal cultural resources. Under Alternative 1, Tribal consultation would not be required. As determined in Section 4.17, Tribal Cultural Resources, the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to Tribal cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, impacts to tribal cultural resources are lesser but comparable under Alternative 1 relative to the proposed Project. Utilities and Service Systems Under Alternative 1, the subject property would remain in its current undeveloped and vacant condition and there would be no impacts to services providing domestic water, sewer, electric power, natural gas, telecommunications or hauling and disposal of solid waste. By comparison, the proposed Project will generate a substantial demand for electric power, which will require the construction of a substation in the Project vicinity. The proposed Project will also require the construction of off -site wells and the extension of water mains to the property. The proposed Project will also require the extension of sewage collection lines and, if desired for the Project, natural gas lines. The extension of telecommunications infrastructure Travertine Draft EIR 7-14 October 2023 796 7.0 ALTERNATIVES to the site will also be required. The expansion of solid waste collection services and adequate disposal site capacity will also be required. As set forth in Section 4.18, the extension and provision of these services can be accomplished without generating significant, unmitigated environmental effects. Accordingly, impacts to utilities and service systems are lesser but comparable under Alternative 1 relative to the proposed Project. Wildfire Alternative 1, No Project / No Build Alternative, would not affect an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, exacerbate wildfire risks, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, and would not require the construction or installation of fire -fighting infrastructure or expose people to other fire -related hazards or risks. By comparison, the proposed Project would introduce land improvements and full- time and part-time occupants of up to 1,200 homes and associated residents and site visitors. As set forth in Section 4.19 of this EIR and per the FHSZ in SRA Map, the project property does not lie in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The southern and southeastern sides of the property, however, abut areas designated as "Very High" and "Moderate" FHSZ, respectively. With application of mitigation measures set forth in Section 4.19, potential wildfire hazards associated with the proposed Project will be less than significant. Accordingly, impacts to wildfire are lesser but comparable under Alternative 1 relative to the proposed Project. Relationship to Project Objectives While potentially significant impacts would be avoided with the No Project / No Build Alternative, three of the four project objectives would not be achieved with Alternative 1. Specifically, Alternative 1 would not achieve the following project objectives: • To develop a mixed -use master planned community, to include varying housing densities and product types, with associated recreational amenities such as, and not limited to, trails and parklands. • To facilitate the attainment of the City's RHNA targets for new residential construction. • To develop a project that will generate sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. 7.3.2 Alternative 2 — No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Under Alternative 2: No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan the Project would revert to the original Travertine Specific Plan approved in 1995. Implementation of Alternative 2 would involve approximately 909 acres and include 2,300 dwelling units, commercial uses on 10 acres, 500-room resort/hotel, 36-hole golf course, a tennis club, private recreation in individual developments, and Travertine Draft EIR 7-15 October 2023 797 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 378 acres of open space (including golf course). Exhibit 7-1 illustrates the proposed land use map of the approved 1995 Specific Plan. Alternative 2 impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation, utilities, and wildfires would be increased compared to the proposed Project, since the No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative proposes a greater extent of land use and intensities. A comparative analysis of impacts for Alternative 2 is provided below: Aesthetics Under Alternative 2, the existing visual character of the project, which is currently vacant land, would be impacted by the development 909 acres. However, aesthetic impacts on surrounding lands from the development of Alternative 2 would be roughly equivalent to those associated with the proposed Project. No upslope development will occur. To the east, Dike 4 obscures views of the subject property from lands farther east, and results in impacts that are essentially the same as for the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would result in increased density and intensity of the project site which, including 2,300 residential units, a 500-room resort/hotel, and 10 acres of commercial uses. These facilities would be required to be developed to the aesthetic standards of the City and the existing and approved Travertine Specific Plan. Therefore, the development standards listed within the 1995 Specific Plan govern the development standards of the site. Table 7-3, below, indicates the developmental standards in the 1995 Specific Plan. Per the Specific Plan, the Resort/Hotel and Commercial uses would be developed to conform to the requirements of the Tourist Commercial District and Neighborhood Commercial District (respectively) as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. However, additional City and agency approvals would be required prior to the development of Alternative 2, including subdivision maps, site development plans and permits. Table 7-3 1995 Specific Plan Development Standards Development Standards Estate Homes Resort Homes Villas Minimum Lot Size 20,000 sf 7,200 sf 3,600 sf Average Lot Width 80 ft 60 ft -- Minimum Lot Width 72 ft 52 ft 36 ft Minimum Cul-de-Sac Lot Width 40 ft 35 ft 24 ft Flag Lot Width 30 ft -- -- Average Lot Depth 125 ft 80 ft 80 ft Maximum Flag Lot Depth 150 ft -- -- Maximum Structure Height' 28 ft 28 ft 28 ft Maximum Number of Stories 2 2 2 Minimum Front Yard Setback 30 ft 20 ft 10 ft Min. Interior/Exterior Side Yard Setbacks 10/20 feet 5/10 ft 0/10 ft on attached side Travertine Draft EIR 7-16 October 2023 798 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 ft 10 ft loft Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 50% 50% Minimum Gross Livable Area 1,600 sf 1,400 sf 1,400 sf Min. Landscape Setbacks Adjacent to - Perimeter street 10 ft min, at any point, 20 ft min average over entire frontage 1. Building heights for residential uses shall be subject to height limits specified in the specific plan, except that no building or structure, regardless of use, exceeding one story (22-feet in height), shall be allowed within 200-feet of any perimeter property line/public street frontage. All building heights shall be measured from finish grade elevation. All other residential structures shall be limited to two stories, not exceeding 28 feet. Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts to scenic vistas compared to the proposed Project when viewed from the existing public trail (Boo Hoff Trail), northwest of the Project property, since the property is visible at this location and the No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative proposes greater land use intensities. The proposed Project, which decreased its project developmental area to avoid aesthetic, biological, and cultural resources, would result in less impacts than Alternative 2. However, Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to scenic vistas and visual character as the proposed Project at other public viewpoint locations, such as areas east of Dike 4, and along Avenue 62, as analyzed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of this DEIR. Moreover, both projects would result in less than significant impacts to aesthetic resources, and neither project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Agricultural Resources As with the proposed Project discussed in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, Alternative 2 would not result in significant impacts to lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, and is consistent with the LESA analysis (Appendix 113.2). Additionally, the Alternative 2 project would not impact Williamson Act Contract lands, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production lands. Therefore, consistent with the findings in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, and the existing land use and zoning designations for the site, impacts associated with Alternative 2 would be essentially the same as for the proposed Project. Air Quality Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear, a relatively larger area of disturbance and scope of facilities under Alternative 2 would translate to foreseeably higher construction -related emission levels than those estimated for the proposed project. This can be explained by a potentially longer construction duration and larger scale of activities involving the increased operation of equipment and vehicles for the completion of site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Moreover, based on the Alternative 2 scope with roughly double the amount of dwelling units (2,300 units under Alternative 2 versus 1,200 units under the proposed Project), and associated resort facilities that represent a more intense use, the combined operational criteria air pollutant emissions, including those linked to mobile sources and Travertine Draft EIR 7-17 October 2023 799 7.0 ALTERNATIVES consumer products, would be doubled compared to the proposed Project, translating to potentially significant and unavoidable impacts at later stages of operation and build -out. Accordingly, Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts to Air Quality than the proposed Project. Biological Resources As previously stated, the proposed Project reduces total Project lands involved to 855 acres from 909 acres and reduces the area of land disturbance to 553.14 acres with temporary impacts of approximately 123.6 acres under the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would result in an increased density and intensity project, constructing 2,300 residential dwelling units, a 500-room resort, a 36- hole golf course, and a tennis club on the entire 909-acre site. Alternative 2 would result in greater habitat loss and disturbance of biological resources than the proposed Project, since the Alternative 2 would impact a greater area. Alternative 2 would develop approximately 354.8 more acres (almost double) than the proposed Project, resulting in permanent impact of 68.24 acres of jurisdictional waters and desert dry wash woodland, which the proposed Project avoided. Development of Alternative 2 would also result in greater impacts to wildlife compared to the proposed Project because Alternative 2 would develop areas immediately adjacent to Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat on Martinez Rockslide. Overall, Alternative 2 would result in greater but comparable impacts. Cultural Resources The cultural studies completed after the approval of the 1995 Specific Plan discovered new cultural resources near and within the subject property boundaries including the Martinez Mountain Rockslide District (MMRD), which was formally established in 2017. Alternative 2 proposes development within the District, therefore disturbing the cultural resources identified. Additionally Alternative 2 would permanently disturb more acreage (almost double). The proposed Project planning area lands have been reduced in size from approximately 909 acres to 855 acres in order to avoid the cultural resources discovered during the proceeding studies. Additionally, as stated Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, the proposed Project will implement mitigation measures that reduce impacts of onsite development to less than significant levels. Mitigation required for onsite development includes construction monitoring by qualified archaeologists; preparation and implementation of a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Monitoring Plan); the protection of all unevaluated and NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources; the facilitation of construction crew cultural sensitivity training; and the implementation of the appropriate measures if human remains are discovered onsite. It was determined that with the implementation of the above mitigation measures, impacts associated with the proposed Project would be reduced to less than significant levels. Although Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would implement mitigation measures, Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts to cultural resources compared to the proposed Project, since the Originally Approved Project (Alternative 2) would develop approximately 354.8 acres more than the Travertine Draft EIR 7-18 October 2023 F. mfe 7.0 ALTERNATIVES proposed Project, including areas within the MMRD, where cultural resources were found. Therefore, since Alternative 2 would develop in areas where cultural resources were discovered during cultural resources studies completed in 2007 and 2017, development of Alternative 2 would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Conversely, the proposed Project mitigated the potential of disturbing these discovered cultural resources by reducing its development area from 909 acres to 554.8 acres. This reduction in Project development acreage ensures that cultural resources identified within the Project site are avoided. Energy Resources Alternative 2 proposes a project with increased intensities and densities, constructing approximately 909 acres, compared to the proposed Project, which would develop approximately 554.8 acres of the overall 855-acre site (approximately 354.8 acres less than the Alternative 2). Specifically, Alternative 2 proposes up 1,100 more homes than the proposed Project, 400 more resort/hotel rooms, and two golf courses. Therefore, Alternative 2 would consume double the energy via electricity, natural gas, and petroleum during construction and operation of the site, compared to the proposed Project, due to the increased intensity and land use area that would be disturbed. Both Alternative 2 and the proposed project would result in short-term energy consumption related to construction activities during development of the property. Construction -related energy use would include the consumption of electricity for tools and power required for constriction trailers. Petroleum fuels, such as gasoline and diesel, would also be required during construction for the operation of machines, large equipment, and employee vehicle trips. Natural gas would not be required during construction activities. As determined in Section 4.6, Energy Resources, of this Draft EIR, the use of electricity and petroleum during the proposed project buildout would not be excessive, or unnecessary, and would cease at the conclusion of construction. Alternative 2 is proposing the development of approximately 354.8 acres more (almost double) than the proposed Project. Therefore, construction of Alternative 2 would take longer than development of the proposed Project, and consumption of electricity and petroleum would be greater compared to the proposed Project. However, construction of the proposed Project or Alternative 2 would not result in excessive consumption of energy and would cease at the end of construction. The operation of the No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative and the proposed Project would result in an increase of energy demand, via electricity, natural gas, and petroleum. However, as determined in Section 4.6, Energy Resources, of this Draft EIR, the use of energy during the proposed Project operations would not be excessive, or unnecessary. Since Alternative 2 proposes an increased density and intensity of the site, including 1,100 more residential homes, 400 more hotel rooms, and two golf courses, the No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative would result in more consumption of energy resources (approximately double), compared to the proposed Project. With the compliance of State building standards, both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would not result in the excessive or unnecessary consumption of energy. Travertine Draft EIR 7-19 October 2023 801 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Geology and Soils Under Alternative 2, the proposed structures would be developed to the most current State and local standards regarding impacts from seismic events. Areas adjacent to the slopes of the Coral Mountain (north) and Martinez Rockslide (south) would be developed as golf course uses to act as a buffer and separate the proposed habitable structures from the slopes. Therefore, habitable structures would not be significantly impacted by landslides and rockfalls. No septic systems would be proposed as a part of Alternative 2. The potential for impacts related to loss of topsoil, sedimentation, erosion, and landform alterations associated with the construction of the site is anticipated to be less than significant, after the approval of grading and site plans by the City of La Quinta. Mitigation required for the development of Alternative 2 would include constructing structures to the standards of the latest edition of the California Building Code and Uniform Building Code; implementing measures established in the Geotechnical Evaluation; conducting rockfall hazard, and soil analyses; and protecting paleontological resources. These mitigation measures are to be implemented in order to reduce Alternative 2's impacts to less than significant. The listed mitigation measures are required for the development of the proposed Project. The implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce impacts to geology and soils to less than significant for both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project. Neither would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Similar to air quality emissions, construction implementation of Alternative 2 under the originally approved Specific Plan would involve a relatively larger area of disturbance and scope of facilities that would translate to higher construction -related GHG emission levels than those estimated for the proposed project. This can be explained by a potentially longer construction duration and larger scale of activities involving the increased operation of equipment and vehicles for site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Moreover, based on the Alternative 2 scope with roughly double the amount of dwelling units (2,300 units under Alternative 2 versus 1,200 units under the proposed Project), and associated resort facilities that represent a more intense use, the combined operational GHG emissions, including those linked to energy, mobile, waste, and water usage sources, would be doubled compared to the proposed Project, translating to potentially significant and unavoidable impacts at build -out of this Alternative. Hazards and Hazardous Materials During construction and operation of the site, Alternative 2 would introduce potentially new hazardous materials related to construction activities or operational activities. Although Alternative 2 would utilize hazardous materials at the site, the use of hazardous materials would not occur in large quantities during the construction of the project structures or in the operation of the property. Travertine Draft EIR 7-20 October 2023 802 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Hazardous materials would be handled and stored in compliance to manufacturer guidelines to ensure the safe use of the product. Additionally, the contractor will identify a controlled staging area within the project limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Strom Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if applicable. The handling of potentially hazardous materials on -site would continue to occur. There would be no uses onsite that would potentially create a hazardous risk to the public or environment or any activities that would inhibit any established hazard evacuation plan. Alternative 2 would implement safety procedures when using, handling, and storing hazardous materials. However, operation of Alternative 2 may result in the use and storage of hazardous materials associated with the resort/golf facilities for maintenance purposes. Therefore, as mitigation, Alternative 2 may be required to develop a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) if the Alternative uses or stores hazardous materials beyond a capacity threshold established by the County of Riverside. The proposed Project is also required to implement this mitigation measure at the Project property if the Project uses or stores hazardous materials beyond a capacity threshold established by the County of Riverside. Therefore, with the implementation of the listed mitigation measure, the impacts of Alternative 2 and the proposed Project to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. The Project proposes a reduced intensity of the Project site, compared to Alternative 2, however, neither would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Hydrology and Water Quality Implementation of Alternative 2 under the originally approved Specific Plan would involve ground disturbance on approximately 909 acres, which is greater than that of the proposed project. Engineering design for Alternative 2 would be required to comply with City standards for the on -site retention of stormwater runoff resulting from the 100-year storm event in a comparable manner to the proposed project. Flood protection from off -site drainage would be comparably required and implemented to the satisfaction of the City engineer and stakeholder agencies. Alternative 2 would be subject to the same regulatory requirements, permit coverages, and engineering design approvals as the proposed project. These would include the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs associated with construction and post -construction stormwater management and surface water quality standards; a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to obtain coverage under the State's NPDES Construction General Permit; and the development, approval, and implementation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). There is no aspect of Alternative 2 that would indicate any need for a deviation from the regulatory requirements and the associated stormwater controls. As discussed below under the Utilities and Service Systems heading, Alternative 2 would require more water to serve a higher number of dwelling units and associated facilities than those involved with the proposed project; however, this increase in water demands is not expected to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. After following the regulatory program requirements designed Travertine Draft EIR 7-21 October 2023 803 7.0 ALTERNATIVES specifically to prevent hydrologic, stormwater and surface water impairments, the impacts resulting from Alternative 2 would be similar to the proposed Project and less than significant. Land Use and Planning Neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed Project would divide an established community, due to its secluded location. However, Alternative 2 would be inconsistent with various City goals and policies, including those that promote the conservation of cultural resources (i.e., Policy CUL-1.2 in the LQGP). Accordingly, Alternative 2 is assumed to result in greater land use impacts than the proposed Project. Noise The construction phase impacts of Alternative 2 and the proposed Project are anticipated to be comparable. Similar to the proposed Project, operational noise from the Alternative 2 is not anticipated to be significant since Alternative 2 proposes uses similar to those in the surrounding area and was previously approved by the City of La Quinta. Additionally, on -site traffic noise would result in less than significant impacts due to the reduced traffic speeds within the community. Alternative 2 proposes an increased intensity, and thus, increased service population and vehicle traffic, compared to the proposed Project, this off -site noise impact would be likely be increased (doubled) by the operation of Alternative 2. Therefore, Alternative 2 is expected to result in greater noise impacts than the proposed Project. Population and Housing Both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would result in the expansion of infrastructure including the expansion of Avenue 62, water infrastructure, and electricity infrastructure. Alternative 2 would extend Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 to provide access to the development, similarly to the proposed Project, as well as the construction of Madison Street, which would also create flood impacts due to the displacement of impoundment area against Dike No. 4. An electrical substation and water wells would be required to support Alternative 2 development. However, the capacity of the substation and the number of wells would be increased in Alternative 2, compared to the proposed Project, since Alternative 2 proposes an increased intensity of onsite land uses. Development of the substation and wells would be subject to review by IID and CVWD, respectively. Additionally, Alternative 2 was approved by the City in 1995, therefore, increases in population, housing, and employment were already considered and accounted for (i.e., planned). Impacts would not be significant and unavoidable. Due to the increased density and intensity proposed for Alternative 2, the No Project / Originally Approved Specific Plan Alternative would result in an increased population (2,201 more residents than the proposed Project), housing (approximately 1,100 more dwelling units compared to the proposed Project), and employment in the City of La Quinta, compared to the proposed Project. Travertine Draft EIR 7-22 October 2023 804 7.0 ALTERNATIVES However, both projects would result in less than significant impacts, and neither project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Public Services Development and operation of Alternative 2 would increase the demand for existing police services, fire services, emergency services, schools, public facilities, and parks within La Quinta. However, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would be required to comply with applicable laws and codes imposed by the City and Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), and the applicant would be required to pay applicable Development Impact Fees supporting fire, police, and school facilities. These regulatory requirements would ensure impacts to public services are reduced to less than significant impacts. Additionally, Alternative 2 would introduce up to 1,665 students to local schools, utilizing CVUSD's most current student generation rate.' Alternative 2 would generate approximately 798 more students than the proposed Project, which would generate 867 students. This increase may require additional facilities and staffing and therefore impacts are assumed to be greater than that of the proposed Project. Overall, Alternative 2 would result in increased impacts to public services compared to the proposed Project, due to its increased land use. Recreation Alternative 2 proposes recreational facilities including a 36-hole golf course, a tennis club, and private recreation in individual developments along with the development of 2,300 dwelling units, commercial uses on 10 acres, and a 500-room resort/hotel. Alternative 2's golf course and tennis club would encompass approximately 381.2 acres of the 909-acre site. The golf course and tennis club acreage does not account for additional recreational amenities the Alternative may include, such as neighborhood parks, public and private trails, etc. Due to the various recreational facilities proposed for both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project, and their payment of Quimby and Development Impact Fees, their impacts on recreational resources are expected to be comparable. Transportation Alternative 2 proposes approximately twice the level of intensive land uses and increased densities, therefore, it can be concluded that transportation impacts generated from the Originally Approved Project Alternative would result in approximately twice the level of daily trips and impacts than the proposed project. 1 As determined in Section 4.14, a majority Project property is located within CVUSD, however, a small portion is located in DSUSD. Since a majority of the site is located within CVUSD's boundary, and the generation rates are higher than DSUSD's, generating a more conservative number of students generated by Alternative 2. Travertine Draft EIR 7-23 October 2023 805 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative 2 would be expected to result in nearly a doubling of impacts related to vehicle traffic during operational activities. Additionally, the Alternative 2 timeframe for construction would be expected to be increased. Alternative 2 includes increased improvements/impacts compared to those included in the proposed project. VMT is roughly but not directly associated with vehicle trips. Alternative 2, like the proposed Project, would provide limited but proportional employment and resort opportunities and VMT for Commercial Uses is anticipated to be similar to the proposed Project and not significant. Residential VMT for Alternative 2 is expected to exceed that of the Proposed Project and has the potential to be significant and unavoidable. Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would result in increased operational impacts as this Alternative would double the intensity of the project. The assumption can be made that Alternative 3 would result in increased impacts. As determined in Section 4.16, the proposed Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in association with proposed Project residential uses. Tribal Cultural Resources Development of Alternative 2 would result in potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources without mitigation. Due to the cultural resources discovered onsite, and the history of the south La Quinta area in which the subject property is located, both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would require the presence of a Cultural Resource Monitor during all ground -disturbing activities, and the development of an Avoidance Mitigation Plan. Additional mitigation measures include retaining a qualified archaeologist and compliance officer to carry out the mitigation measures required; implementing a Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (Monitoring Plan); protecting all unevaluated and NRHP- and CRHR-eligible resources; providing cultural sensitivity training; and retaining an archaeological monitor would reduce the Project's impacts to less than significant. Although Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would implement mitigation measures, Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts to cultural resources and Tribal cultural resources compared to the proposed Project, since the Originally Approved Project (Alternative 2) would develop approximately 354.8-acres more than the proposed Project, including areas within the MMRD. Therefore, since Alternative 2 would develop in areas where Tribal cultural resources could be found, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts. Conversely, the proposed Project mitigated the potential of disturbing the Tribal cultural resources by reducing its development area from 909 acres to 554.8 acres. This reduction in Project development acreage ensures that Tribal cultural resources within the Project site are avoided. Utilities and Service Systems Water Travertine Draft EIR 7-24 October 2023 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) would provide water to the site via existing water lines at the Avenue 62 and Monroe Street intersection, and the Madison Street Avenue 60 intersection. The subject property would connect to these existing water mains via underground pipes along the rights - of -way to provide domestic water to the site. An increase in the water supply to the area would be required during the construction and operation of the proposed uses. As determined in Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed Project would represent 0.45 percent of CVWD's total projected Urban Water demand in 2040. However, in order to comply with CVWD standards, the proposed Project shall implement water conservation methods, including the installation of drought -tolerant landscaping, and water -efficient fixtures. Therefore, it was concluded that CVWD has adequate supply to support the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would result in greater water demand than the proposed Project due to its increased land use size and intensity. Water demand to support the 500-room resort (400 more rooms than the proposed Project); the 2,300 residential dwelling units (1,100 more dwellings than the Project); and the 36-hole golf course (approximately 24 to 30 more holes than the Project) would result in a greater water consumption, compared to the proposed Project. However, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would be required to implement water conservation measures in order to reduce water consumption at the site. Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 would be required to develop a project - specific Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) would analyze water consumed during operation of Alternative 2 and determine whether CVWD has the supply and infrastructure to support the Alternative. Alternative 2, like the proposed Project, would be required to construct onsite water tanks and booster stations to serve the site, as well as off -site water wells in compliance with CVWD guidelines and standards. The proposed Project requires one 600,000-gallon and 2,650,000-gallon water tank and five wells. The size of the water tanks and number of wells required for Alternative 2 would likely be increased, compared to the proposed Project, due to the increased property area proposed in Alternative 2. However, the onsite and offsite water infrastructure required for Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would be developed in compliance with CVWD's existing standards and reviewed by CVWD as the responsible agency. For the above reasons, Alternative 2 would result in greater but comparable impacts to water supplies. Wastewater The proposed Project would result in the generation of 0.27 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater, which would be conveyed to Wastewater Replenishment Plant 4 (WRP-4). WRP-4 has a capacity of 9.5 mgd. The proposed Project would generate 2.7 percent of WRP-4's capacity and result in less than significant impacts (see Section 4.18). Alternative 2 would generate more wastewater compared to the proposed Project, since Alternative 2 proposes an increased land use area and intensity. The 400 additional hotel rooms, 1,100 additional residential dwellings, and additional Travertine Draft EIR 7-25 October 2023 807 7.0 ALTERNATIVES commercial and recreational amenities would more than double the amount of wastewater produced by the site. However, even double the amount of the project -generated wastewater would be 0.52 mgd, which is approximately 5.5 percent of WRP-4's capacity. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would connect to existing CVWD sewer infrastructure located at the Avenue 62 and Monroe Street intersection (east). Alternative 2 would connect to the sewer infrastructure via underground pipes within the existing Avenue 62 right-of-way. For the above reasons, Alternative 2 would be more impactful with respect to wastewater resources but its impact would be comparable to the proposed Project. Storm Water Drainage Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would be designed to divert the off -site flows around the subject property and into the Groundwater Replenishment Facility. Development of Alternative 2 would require bridge crossings via Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street, extending over Dike No. 4 and the Guadalupe Dike, respectively. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would also be required to assess onsite drainage flows from stormwater runoff. The Project proposes to convey onsite stormwater via underground storm drains and catch basins to two onsite surface basins located at the east end of the property. The facilities and basins are sized and located to handle the controlling 100-year storm event volume. Onsite stormwater drainage facilities for Alternative 2 would be designed to convey onsite runoff to handle the controlling 100-year storm event. Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would each result in less than significant impacts to drainage with the implementation of project design features and their hydrological and public utilities impacts are comparable. Solid Waste The development of Alternative 2 and the proposed Project buildings would require solid waste services to remove waste produced by construction activities. Cal Green standards applies to all cities in California, and mandates that all new building construction develop a waste management plan that includes diversion of at least 50% of construction and demolition material from landfills, through recycling and/or reuse. Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would be required to comply with Cal Green standards. Additionally, construction waste generated at the subject site would cease at its completion. Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would generate more solid waste due to its increased land use intensity; however, neither projects would result in significant impacts to solid waste facilities and their solid waste impacts would therefore be comparable. Electricity Travertine Draft EIR 7-26 October 2023 F. 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative 2 would result in more electricity consumption than the proposed Project, primarily because of the increase of project intensity, and a new substation would still be required to support electricity demand in light of projected growth within IID's service area. Because the level of development contemplated under both proposed Project and Alternative 2 are accounted for in IID's service area growth projections, their impacts would be comparable. Natural Gas Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would be required to connect to existing Southern California Gas Company infrastructure to provide natural gas to the subject property. Existing underground natural gas lines are located near the subject property along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, north and northeast of the subject property, respectively. Neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed Project are anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new natural gas facilities which could result in significant environmental effects. As such, the utilities impacts of Alternative 2 are comparable. Telecommunications Both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would be required to connect to existing infrastructure, either by Frontier or Charter to provide telecommunication services to the subject property. Additional infrastructure is not required for Alternative 2 or the proposed Project. Both Alternative 2 and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to telecommunication services and their impacts are therefore comparable. Wildfire Alternative 2 would not be significantly impacted by wildfire in the area. Although the subject property lies adjacent to the Santa Rosa Mountains, wildfire risk in this area is not considered significant by the City of La Quinta because the Santa Rosa Mountains do not support dense vegetative growth. The occurrence of a wildfire at the subject property is not anticipated to occur since the likelihood of a wildfire is small in the City. A Fire Master Plan (FMP) and Addendum FMP were conducted for the Project to analyze the fire impacts at the site and evaluate adequate fire and emergency services, evacuation, and response during partial and full buildout of the Project. Per the FMP and Addendum FMP, the proposed Project would maintain a landscaped strip adjacent to conservation areas as defensible space; develop two water reservoirs and booster stations to CVWD standards to provide water to the area; implement construction standards 5A, Type V-A, level building standards, for Phase I construction only; provide adequate space for a diesel fueled standby generators in a recessed concrete structure by the booster pumps, designed to CVWD standards; and provide developer plans showing fire system connections and information on the type of fire system that is being installed for the development, to be submitted to and reviewed by CVWD. Impacts of wildfires were determined Travertine Draft EIR 7-27 October 2023 F. mfe 7.0 ALTERNATIVES to be less than significant. Alternative 2 would be required to implement the above to ensure wildfire impacts are less than significant. Alternative 2 would be subject to review by the Fire Department to ensure adequate emergency access to the site, and adequate facilities are provided onsite. Alternative 2 and the proposed Project are, therefore anticipated to result in comparable and less than significant wildfire impacts. Relationship to Project Objectives The following Project objectives would not be achieved by Alternative 2 to the same degree as the Project: • To preserve or mitigate impacts to sensitive biological resources in a manner consistent with current Federal, State and local requirements. • To develop a project that will generate a sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in a project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. • Provide for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the community and environs from flooding and hydrological hazards. 7.3.3 Alternative 3 — Phase 1 (A and B) Only Phase 1 Only Alternative ("Alternative 3") would develop Phase 1 (A and B) of the subject property, which includes 604 residential dwelling units on approximately 243.4 acres, a resort/golf facility on approximately 46.2 acres, open space recreational on approximately 35.5 acres, and open space natural uses on approximately 301.2 acres. Development of Alternative 3 would include the westerly extension of Avenue 62. However, this Alternative would not develop the southerly extension of Jefferson Street. The proposed land uses for Alternative 3 are provided in the table below and illustrated in Exhibit 7-2 and 7-3. Implementation of Alternative 3 would include a 46.2-acre resort/golf use, which would develop a golf training/practice facility with clubhouse and banquet facilities. Alternative 3 would require a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to allow the land use and zoning changes, similar to the proposed Project. A comparative analysis of impacts for Alternative 3 is provided below: Aesthetics Development of Alternative 3 would result in changes to the visual character of the subject property. However, aesthetic impacts on surrounding lands from development of Alternative 3 would be roughly equivalent to those associated with the proposed Project. No upslope development will occur. To the east, Dike No. 4 obscures views of the subject property from lands farther east, and results in impacts that are essentially the same for the proposed Project. Travertine Draft EIR 7-28 October 2023 810 7.0 ALTERNATIVES As determined in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, in the Draft EIR, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to aesthetic resources, including scenic vistas, visual character, or state scenic highways and mitigation would not be required. The proposed Project would adhere to City standards and regulations regarding building heights and setbacks, which operate to protect the scenic vistas. Additionally, lighting fixtures utilized for the proposed project would remain consistent with the City standards, as determined in Section 4.1, Aesthetics. Alternative 3 would result in a reduced density property (only developing Phase 1 of the Project property). Similar to the proposed Project, these facilities would be required to be developed to the aesthetic standards of the City and the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, which would act to govern the development standards and design guidelines of the subject property. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in similar and reduced impacts compared to the proposed Project. Agricultural Resources As with the proposed Project discussed in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, Alternative 3 would not result in significant impacts to lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, and is consistent with the LESA analysis (Appendix B.2). Additionally, the Alternative 3 project would not impact Williamson Act Contract lands, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production lands. Therefore, consistent with the findings in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, and the existing land use and zoning designations for the site, impacts associated with Alternative 3 would be essentially the same as for the proposed Project. Air Quality Implementation of Alternative 3 would involve a reduced number of residential units compared to the proposed project. Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear, a relatively smaller area of disturbance and scope of facilities under Alternative 3 would translate to foreseeably lower construction -related emission levels by half compared to the levels estimated for the proposed Project. This can be explained by a potentially shorter construction duration and smaller scale of activities involving the reduced operation of equipment and vehicles for site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Moreover, based on the smaller number of dwelling units (600 units under Alternative 3 versus 1,200 under the proposed Project) and associated resort facilities that represent a less intense use, the combined operational emissions, including those linked to mobile sources and consumer products, would also be relatively lower by approximately 50 percent compared to the proposed Project, leading to potentially less than significant impacts at build -out. Biological Resources Travertine Draft EIR 7-29 October 2023 811 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative 3 would result in a reduced density project, occupying only 628.6 acres (compared to the proposed 855 acres), and developing approximately 327.4 acres compared to the 553 acres proposed Project would not be developed under Alternative 3. Therefore, the permanent impact of approximately 16.39 acres of jurisdictional waters (approximately 18 percent less than the proposed Project), and 1.27 acres of desert dry wash woodland (approximately 2.27 percent less than the proposed Project) in the northern portion of the Project would not be impacted by Alternative 3. Alternative 3 would also avoid the temporary impact of 12.15 acres of jurisdictional waters. The Phase 1 Only Alternative would result in lesser impacts to biological resources relative to the proposed Project. Cultural Resources Per the conclusions in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR, cultural resources were discovered near and within the subject property, including the Martinez Mountain Rockslide District (MMRD). Due to the findings of existing cultural resources onsite, it is possible that cultural resources exist below the ground surface. Although both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would implement mitigation measures to reduce impacts to cultural resources to less than significant, Alternative 3 would result in less impacts compared to the proposed Project, since it would develop a smaller portion (approximately 226.4 acres less or a quarter) of the proposed Project. Energy Resources Both Alternative 3 and the proposed project would result in short-term energy consumption related to construction activities during development of the property. Construction -related energy use would include the consumption of electricity for tools and power required for constriction trailers. According to Section 4.6, Energy Resources, the proposed Project would consume approximately 191,088.1 kWh of electricity during construction of the Project site, including electricity consumed during the development of the off -site utility field. Utilizing the CalEEMod modelling prepared for the proposed Project, it can be calculated that Alternative 3 would consume approximately 94,736.3 kWh during construction of the Alternative.Z Alternative 3 would consume approximately half of the electricity compared to the proposed Project. Petroleum fuels, such as gasoline and diesel, would also be required during construction for the operation of machines, large equipment, and employee vehicle trips. As determined in Section 4.6, the proposed Project would consume approximately 2,963,234.8 gallons of diesel fuel and 147,652.6 gallons of gasoline. Using the CalEEMod modelling prepared for the proposed Project, it can be calculated that Alternative 3 would consume approximately 2,342,416.7 gallons to diesel and 81,274 Z Assuming that 3 offsite wells would be constructed instead of 5. This calculation uses the Phase A Grading Activities, Substation Construction, Well Construction, and Physical Construction of Phase 1. Travertine Draft EIR 7-30 October 2023 812 7.0 ALTERNATIVES gallons of gasoline during construction. Alternative 3 would consume less petroleum compared to the proposed Project. Natural gas would not be required during construction activities. However, as determined in Section 4.6 of this Draft EIR, the use of electricity and petroleum during the proposed project buildout would not be excessive, or unnecessary, and would cease at the conclusion of construction. The operation of Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in an increase of energy demand, via electricity, natural gas, and petroleum. As determined in Section 4.6, the proposed Project would consume approximately 12,987,903 kWh of electricity annually and 43,474,439 kBTU of natural gas annually. Alternative 3 proposes to develop approximately half of the residential uses (i.e., 604 residential units compared to the 1,200 residential units proposed for the Project), and half of the resort uses (i.e., 46.2 acres compared to the 84.5 acres proposed for the Project). Therefore, Alternative 3 would consume approximately half of the electricity and natural gas consumed compared to the proposed Project. Utilizing the same methodologies used to calculate electricity and natural gas consumption, Alternative 3 would consume approximately half of the amount of petroleum annually during operation compared to the proposed Project. However, as determined in Section 4.6, the use of energy during the proposed Project operations would not be excessive, or unnecessary. Since Alternative 3 proposes a reduced density and intensity of the site, Alternative 3 would result in less consumption of energy resources, compared to the proposed Project. Additionally, both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be required to implement design features in compliance with Title 24 and CALGreen requirements related to energy efficiency. The proposed Project is required to develop an off -site substation to serve the Project property. The substation would be developed during phase 1 of Project construction. Under Alternative 3, the subject site would still be required to develop an off -site substation. The substation would be constructed to IID standards, and as determined in Section 4.6, the proposed development of the substation would not result in the excessive, unnecessary, or wasteful use of energy resources. As previously stated, Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in an increase of energy demand in the area, due to the proposed construction and operation of the residential and resort uses. However, neither project would not result in significant impacts regarding energy resources, and mitigation is not required. Accordingly, Alternative 3 would result in lesser but comparable impacts relative to the proposed Project. Geology and Soils Similar to the proposed Project, structures proposed in Alternative 3 would be required to be developed to the most current State and local standards regarding impacts from seismic events. The Travertine Draft EIR 7-31 October 2023 813 7.0 ALTERNATIVES proposed structures would not be located adjacent to the slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and are not anticipated to be impacted by rockfalls or landslides. No septic systems are proposed. The potential for impacts related to loss of topsoil, sedimentation, erosion, and landform alterations associated with the construction of the site is anticipated to be less than significant. Mitigation required for the development of Alternative 3 would include constructing structures to the standards of the latest edition of the California Building Code and Uniform Building Code; implementing measure established in the Geotechnical Evaluation; conducting rockfall hazard and soil analyses; and protecting paleontological resources. These mitigation measures are to be implemented in order to reduce Alternative 3's impacts to less than significant. The listed mitigation measures would also be required for the development of the proposed Project, which would develop 1,200 residential dwelling units, a 100-room resort, associated resort amenities, and a golf club and practice facility. The implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce impacts to geology and soils to less than significant for both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project. Neither would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Accordingly, the geology and soils impacts of Alternative 3 and the proposed Project are comparable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Similar to air quality emissions, construction implementation of Alternative 3 with a reduced number of dwelling units would involve a relatively smaller area of disturbance and scope of facilities that would translate to lower construction -related GHG emission levels by half compared to the levels estimated for the proposed Project. This can be explained by a potentially shorter construction duration and smaller scale of activities involving the reduced operation of equipment and vehicles for site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Moreover, based on the smaller number of dwelling units (600 units under Alternative 3 versus 1,200 under the proposed Project) and using a similar measure of per capita GHG efficiency, the combined operational GHG emissions, including those linked to energy, mobile, waste, and water usage sources, would also be relatively lower by half compared to the proposed Project, translating to potentially less than significant impacts at build -out. The construction and operation of up to 600 dwelling units may still exceed the screening measure of 3,000 MTCO2e per year that usually rates smaller projects. This is in reference to regional studies, like the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Guidelines, which have found that it takes approximately 110 dwelling units to produce the above -noted screening quantity. Accordingly, Alternative 3 would result in lesser GHG emissions than the proposed Project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Alternative 3 would introduce hazardous materials related to construction or operational activities during development and operation of the subject site. Although Alternative 3 would utilize hazardous materials at the subject property, the use of hazardous materials would not occur in large quantities Travertine Draft EIR 7-32 October 2023 814 7.0 ALTERNATIVES during construction or operation of Alternative 3. Hazardous materials would be handled and stored in compliance with manufacturer guidelines to ensure the safe use of the product. Additionally, the contractor will identify a controlled staging area within the project limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Strom Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (Mitigation Measure HAZ-4). By complying with these mitigation measures and standard requirements (i.e., implementing a SWPPP and complying with manufacturer guidelines) during construction, Alternative 3 would not create a hazardous risk to the public or environment. As stated in Section 4.9 of this Draft EIR, I proposed Project is also required to implement a HMBP as mitigation if the Project uses or stores hazardous materials beyond a capacity threshold established by the County of Riverside (Mitigation Measures HAZ-5 and -6). Therefore, with the implementation of the mitigation measures, the impacts of Alternative 3 and the proposed Project to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. For the above reasons, hazards and hazardous materials impacts of Alternative 3 are comparable to the proposed Project. Hydrology and Water Quality Implementation of Alternative 3 would involve a smaller area of disturbance for site clearing, grading, and construction, than that of the proposed Project. Engineering design for Alternative 3 would be required to comply with City standards for the on -site retention of stormwater runoff resulting from the 100-year storm event in a comparable manner to the proposed Project. Flood protection from off -site drainage would be comparably required and implemented to the satisfaction of the City engineer and stakeholder agencies. Alternative 3 would be subject to the same regulatory requirements, permit coverages, and engineering design approvals as the proposed Project. These would include the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs associated with construction and post -construction stormwater management and surface water quality standards; a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to obtain coverage under the State's NPDES Construction General Permit; and the development, approval, and implementation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The impacts resulting from Alternative 3 would be comparable to the proposed Project. Land Use and Planning Alternative 3 proposes a reduced intensity community, compared to the proposed Project. Like the proposed Project, none of these entitlements would result in any conflicts with or significant impacts to any land use plan, policy or regulation (see Section 4.11). Alternative 3 would have comparable impacts on land use as compared to the proposed Project. Noise The construction phase impacts of Alternative 3 and the proposed Project are anticipated to be comparable. Similar to the proposed Project, operational noise from the Alternative 3 is not Travertine Draft EIR 7-33 October 2023 815 7.0 ALTERNATIVES anticipated to be significant since Alternative 3 proposes uses similar tot hose in the surrounding area. Additionally, on -site traffic noise would result in less than significant impacts due to the low vehicle speeds proposed in residential and resort neighborhoods. However, as determined in Section 4.12, Noise, the proposed Project would result in the increase of off -site traffic noise on the Avenue 62 Segment, east of the subject property (south of the Trilogy residential and golf community). However, this increase results in less than significant impacts. Alternative 3 proposes a reduced intensity compared to the proposed Project, removing approximately 227.4 acres from development to include 596 residential units, the resort facility with 100 keys, and multiple open space recreational uses. It is likely that the removal of these uses would result in the reduction of the offsite traffic noise to less than significant levels. Therefore, the proposed Project and Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts. Compared to the proposed Project, the Alternative 3 would produce less offsite noise impacts due to the reduced land use intensity proposed. Population and Housing The subject property is currently vacant and does not provide housing to the City of La Quinta. Alternative 3 proposes the development of 604 dwelling units on the subject property. Utilizing the average household size of 2.37 (Department of Finance), the population anticipated from Alternative 3 would equate to 1,422 new residents. The proposed Project would introduce 1,200 residential dwelling units, and result in 3,250 residents (based on the VMT Evaluation provided by Urban Crossroads in Appendix M.2). Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project's increase in residents are below the projected 2035 and 2040 population forecasts of 46,297 and 47,700 people, respectively. Alternative 3 would result in less residential housing compared to the proposed Project. The approximately 46.2-acre resort/golf portion of Alternative 3 would result in employment opportunities at the subject property. However, Alternative 3 would not develop the resort/spa facility proposed for the Project. The Project's resort/spa would include 100 rooms, spa and wellness center, and additional amenities, resulting in employment opportunities in the City. Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in the expansion of infrastructure including the expansion of Avenue 62, water infrastructure, sewer lines, and electricity infrastructure (including an offsite substation). Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would extend Avenue 62 westward to provide access to the development. However, Alternative 3 would not extend Jefferson Street south to the subject property. An offsite electrical substation would be required to support Alternative 3 development, as well as the development of wells. However, the capacity of the substation and the number of wells would be decreased for Alternative 3, compared to the proposed Project, since Alternative 3 proposes a decreased intensity. Development of the wells and substation would be subject to review by CVWD and IID, respectively. Travertine Draft EIR 7-34 October 2023 816 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Due to Alternative 3's decreased density and intensity proposed, the Phase 1 Only Alternative would result in less population (approximately 1,828 people), housing (596 less dwelling units), and employment in the City of La Quinta, compared to the proposed Project. However, both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts. Neither project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts and therefore their impacts are comparable. Public Services Alternative 3 would introduce residents and uses that would increase the use of the City of La Quinta's existing public services. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in an increased demand in police, fire, and emergency services, and schools, public facilities, and parks. However, like the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would be required to comply with applicable laws and codes imposed by the City and Riverside County Fire Department, and the applicant would be required to pay applicable Development Impact Fees. These regulatory requirements would ensure impacts to public services are less than significant impacts. Due to the subject property's location in the southern -most portion of La Quinta, the closest fire station is located approximately 4.0 miles north. Thus, RCFD indicated that the property may not be adequately served by fire protection services within the 5- to 7-minute response time, resulting in impacts to fire protective services. Thus, a Project -specific Fire Master Plan (FMP) and Addendum FMP was developed to analyze emergency access to the Project property and determine and implement strategies at the property to improve RCFD and CAL Fire operations and service delivery. The FMP includes safety measures such as approved emergency access points, roadway design standards for fire protection vehicles, minimum water quantity and pressure necessary for firefighting (see Mitigation Measure PS-1, in Section 4.14, Public Services). The FMP allows the development to build 600 units and thereby avoid measures, such as the construction of a new fire station until the remaining residential units are built. The Addendum FMP evaluates full buildout of the Project (i.e., 1,200 residential units) and ensures adequate fire protection for the area through enhanced building construction standards, emergency power facilities for the booster stations, an area of refuge, access for emergency vehicles implementation of a community emergency response team, and HOA/community training for CPR and AED (see Mitigation Measure PS-2 in Section 4.14). In order to provide an acceptable level of service to the southern portion of La Quinta, which is experiencing development and increased service demands, the County Fire Department has preliminary plans for a future fire station to serve this portion of the City. The future fire station is proposed at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. The response time from the new fire station to the Project property is approximately 6 minutes. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 will be required to provide the fair share portion of development fees for fire station funding. Travertine Draft EIR 7-35 October 2023 817 7.0 ALTERNATIVES The Project would be required to implement all applicable fire safety requirements, to include the installation of fire hydrants, and sprinkler systems. Moreover, the Project would be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) in place at the time of construction which goes towards the funding of public facilities including but not limited to fire stations, park and recreation facilities, major thoroughfares and bridges and traffic signalization, public safety facilities and other public buildings. Based on the most recent population numbers provided by the Department of Finance (DOF), City's current population in 2022 is 37,860, thus resulting in the current ratio of 1.35 officers per 1,000 residents. Buildout of Alternative 3 could add approximately 1,828 new residents to the City, for a total of 39,688 residents. At current staffing levels, Alternative 3's added population would result in a city-wide ratio of 1.23 officers per resident, which exceeds the 1 per 1,000 generally acceptable ratio. Alternative 3 would also introduce approximately 436 students to local schools, utilizing CVUSD's and DSUSD's most current student generation rates.3 Alternative 3 would generate approximately 431 less students than the proposed Project, which would generate 867 students. Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be required to pay school impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits. Payment of school impact fees by all new residential development projects is considered "full and complete school facilities mitigation" of any school impacts (Government Code Section 65996). Thus, both projects would result in less than significant impacts to schools. Alternative 3 would result in reduced impacts to public services compared to the proposed Project, due to its reduced land use intensity. However, both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project will result in less than significant impacts with the payment of development fees and the implementation of mitigation measures and their public services impacts are comparable. Recreation Alternative 3 proposes the construction of 604 residential dwelling units, a resort/golf facility with clubhouse and golf training facility, and open space recreational uses. Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in less impacts to recreation, since the Phase 1 Only Alternative will develop a reduced project. Chapter 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code requires the provision of three (3) acres of parkland set aside for each 1,000 residents. In order to calculate the number of parkland acres required, the number of dwelling units in a new subdivision is multiplied by the average household size (based on the latest U.S. Census information). Per the U.S. Census, the average household size in La Quinta is 2.55 persons, which would result in a project -generated population of 1,540. Therefore, pursuant to the La Quinta Municipal Code, buildout of Alternative 3 would require a total of 4.62 acres of 3 As determined in Section 4.14, a majority Project property is located within CVUSD, however, a small portion is located in DSUSD. In this analysis, it was assumed that 6 units would be located within DSUSD's boundary (similar to the proposed Project) and 598 units would be located within CVUSD's boundaries. Travertine Draft EIR 7-36 October 2023 818 7.0 ALTERNATIVES parkland. Alternative 3 proposes 46.2 acres of recreational uses, therefore, is compliant with the City's standard. The proposed Project would develop a golf clubhouse and practice facility, and open space uses, including a recreational hiking trail. Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in the use of recreational facilities in the City, as a result of an increased population, however, this increase will be nominal since both Alternative 3 and the Project proposes multiple recreational amenities. The residents will likely utilize the recreational amenities provided by the projects, therefore, reducing impacts to public recreational facilities. Both the proposed Project and Alternative 3 would also be required to pay Quimby Act and City Development Impact Fees in order to reduce impacts to public recreational facilities. Therefore, both the proposed Project and Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts, and neither projects would result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Transportation The Phase 1 Only Alternative 3 proposes the construction and operation of half of the proposed Project. Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 3 would result in less than significant operational impacts as this Alternative would essentially reduce the intensity of the project by half. Alternative 3 is analyzed in the TIA as Phase 1 (2026). Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts because this Alternative would effectively reduce the intensity of the project by half. Impacts related to Residential and Non -Residential VMT are also expected to be reduced based on the reduced intensity of Alternative 3. VMT is roughly but not directly associated with ADT, however Alternative 3, like the proposed Project, would not provide traditional commercial services to serve residents. Therefore, the residential VMT is not expected to exceed that of the proposed Project, however impacts may still be significant. As determined in Section 4.16, the proposed Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in association with proposed Project residential uses. Approval of the proposed Project will require the adoption of a statement of overriding consideration due to Project VMTs. Alternative 3 would have less impacts on transportation and VMT as compared to the proposed Project. Tribal Cultural Resources Without mitigation implemented, Alternative 3 would result in impacts to tribal cultural resources, similar to the proposed Project. Although the proposed project would implement the same mitigation to reduce impacts to Tribal cultural resources to less than significant, Alternative 3 would result in less impacts than the proposed Project, since Alternative 3 would develop a smaller portion (approximately 226.4 acres less or a quarter) of the proposed Project. Travertine Draft EIR 7-37 October 2023 819 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Utilities and Service Systems Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in less impacts to utilities due to the reduced impact and land use intensity of Alternative 3 (developing approximately 227.4 acres less than the proposed Project). However, neither would have a significant impact and therefore impacts are comparable. Water Water services would be supplied to the subject property by CVWD via existing water lines at the Avenue 62 and Monroe Street intersection, and the Madison Street and Avenue 60 intersection. The subject property would connect to these existing water mains via underground pipes along the rights - of -way to provide domestic water to the site. Development of Alternative 3 or the proposed Project would result in an increase in water supply to the area during the construction and operation of the proposed uses. As determined in Section 4.18, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed Project would result in less than 1.09 percent of CVWD's water supply in 2020, and less than 0.64 percent of CVWD's water supply in 2035. However, in order to comply with CVWD standards, the proposed Project shall implement water conservation methods, including the installation of drought -tolerant landscaping, and water -efficient fixtures. Therefore, it was concluded that CVWD has adequate supply to support the proposed Project. Alternative 3 would result in a reduced water demand than the proposed Project due to its reduced land use size and intensity (decreasing the residential units from 1,200 to 604 units and removing the 38.3-acre resort/spa use from development). The reduction of residential and resort uses onsite by half would result in a reduction of water consumption by half. Thus, Alternative 3 would consume approximately 433.74 acre-feet per year (AFY), compared to the proposed Project which would consume 867.47 AFY. However, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would be required to implement water efficient measures in order to conserve water at the site. As analyzed in Section 4.18 and the Project -specific Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV), CVWD has the water supply to support the proposed Project. Since Alternative 3 would consume less water than the proposed Project, it can be assumed that water could be served to the site during construction and operation of Alternative 3. Alternative 3, like the proposed Project, would be required to construct onsite water tanks and booster stations to serve the site, as well as off -site water wells in compliance with CVWD guidelines and standards. The proposed Project requires one 600,000-gallon and 2,650,000-gallon water tank and five wells. The size of the water tanks and number of wells required for Alternative 3 would likely be reduced, compared to the proposed Project, due to the reduced development area proposed in Alternative 3. However, the onsite and offsite water infrastructure required for Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be developed in compliance with CVWD's existing standards and reviewed Travertine Draft EIR 7-38 October 2023 820 7.0 ALTERNATIVES by CVWD as the responsible agency. For the above reasons, Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in comparable impacts to water supplies. Wastewater Alternative 3 would generate less wastewater compared to the proposed Project, since Alternative 3 proposes a reduced land use area and intensity. The reduced residential dwellings (604 instead of 1,200), and resort uses (46.2 out of 84.5 acres) would reduce wastewater generated by approximately half, from 0.26 mgd to 0.13 mgd. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would connect to existing CVWD sewer infrastructure located at the Avenue 62 and Monroe Street intersection (east). Alternative 3 would connect to the sewer infrastructure via underground pipes within the existing Avenue 62 right-of-way. For the above reasons, Alternative 3 would be less impactful with respect to wastewater resources but its impacts would be comparable to the proposed Project. Storm Water Drainage Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would be designed to divert the off -site flows around the subject property and into the Groundwater replenishment Facility. Development of Alternative 3 would require bridge crossings over Dike No. 4 via Avenue 62. Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would convey onsite stormwater via underground storm drains and catch basins to two onsite surface basins located at the east end of the property, in Planning Areas 18 and 19. The facilities and basins are sized and located to handle the controlling 100-year storm event volume, supporting build -out of the proposed Project. Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would each result in less than significant impacts to drainage with the implementation of project design features and their hydrological and public utilities impacts are comparable. Solid Waste The development of Alternative 3 and the proposed Project buildings would require solid waste services to remove waste produced by construction activities. Cal Green standards applies to all cities in California, and mandates that all new building construction develop a waste management plan that includes diversion of at least 50% of construction and demolition material from landfills, through recycling and/or reuse. Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be required to comply with Cal Green standards. Additionally, construction waste produced by the subject property would cease after its completion. Compared to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would generate less solid waste due to its reduced land use intensity; however, neither projects would result in significant impacts to solid waste facilities and their solid waste impacts would therefore be comparable. Electricity Travertine Draft EIR 7-39 October 2023 821 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative 3 would result in less electricity consumption than the proposed Project primarily because of the reduction in dwelling units, but a new IID substation would still be required to support electricity demand in light of projected growth within IID's service area. Because the level of development contemplated under both proposed Project and Alternative 3 are accounted for in IID's service area growth projections, their impacts would be comparable. Natural Gas Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be required to connect to existing Southern California Gas Company infrastructure to provide natural gas to the subject property. Existing underground natural gas lines are located near the subject property along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, north and northeast of the subject property, respectively. Neither Alternative 3 nor the proposed Project are anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new natural gas facilities which could result in significant environmental effects. As such, the utilities impacts of Alternative 3 are comparable. Telecommunications Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would be required to connect to existing infrastructure, either by Frontier or Charter to provide telecommunication services to the subject property. Additional infrastructure is not required for Alternative 3 or the proposed Project. Both Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to telecommunication services and their impacts are therefore comparable. Wildfire Alternative 3 and the proposed Project would implement an evaluation plan and project design features to address wildfire risk and their impacts with respect to wildfire risk are comparable and less than significant. Relationship to Project Objectives While potentially significant impacts would be avoided with Alternative 3, the following project objectives would not be achieved to the same degree as the proposed Project with Alternative 3: • To develop a mixed -use master planned community, to include varying housing densities and housing product types, with associated recreational amenities such as, and not limited to, trails and parklands. • To facilitate the attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets for new residential construction. Travertine Draft EIR 7-40 October 2023 822 7.0 ALTERNATIVES • To develop a project that will generate a sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in a project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. 7.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior alternative among those evaluated in an EIR. If the environmentally superior alternative is the "no project" alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project Alternatives is provided in Table 7-4, Comparison of Alternatives to Project. As displayed in the table, the first row indicates the proposed project and alternatives, while the first column indicates the environmental topic. Table 7-4 illustrates in tabular form the environmental impacts of the proposed project relative to Alternative 1, 2, and 3. Of the Alternatives considered in this Draft EIR section, Alternative 1 (No Project/No Build) is environmentally superior to the other Alternatives because this Alternative would avoid the significant impacts identified for the Project. This Alternative also reduces the environmental impacts to the greatest degree as compared to the other alternatives. Of the remaining alternatives, Alternative 3 (Phase 1 Only) would be the environmentally superior alternative because it would result in lesser impacts in a number of resource areas and would reduce or eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project relative to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. Alternative 3 does not meet the to the same degree as the proposed project the objectives of facilitating the attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets for new residential construction; or of developing a project that will generate a sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in a project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. Travertine Draft EIR 7-41 October 2023 823 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Table 7-5 Comparison of Alternatives and Project Environmental Impacts of the Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Project / Originally Alternative 3 Topic Proposed Project No Project / No Build Approved Specific Plan Phase 1 Only Aesthetics Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater and comparable - Less Similar and comparable — Less with Mitigation No Impact than Significant with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Agricultural Resources Less than Significant Similar and comparable Similar and comparable — Less Similar and comparable — Less — Less than Significant than Significant than Significant Air Quality Significant and Lesser — No Impact Greater — Significant and Lesser but comparable — Less Unavoidable Unavoidable than Significant Biological Resources Less than Significant Lesser or comparable — Greater but comparable — Less Lesser but comparable — Less with Mitigation No Impact than Significant with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Cultural Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater — Significant and Lesser but comparable — Less Resources with Mitigation No Impact Unavoidable than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Greater — Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Less Energy with Mitigation Lesser — No Impact with Mitigation than Significant Geology and Soils Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Similar and comparable — Less Similar and comparable — Less with Mitigation No Impact than Significant with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Greenhouse Gas Significant and Lesser — No Impact Greater — Significant and Lesser — Less than Significant Unavoidable Unavoidable Hazards and Hazardous Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Similar — Less than Significant Similar and comparable — Less Materials with Mitigation No Impact with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Hydrology and Water Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater — Less than Significant Similar and comparable — Less Quality with Mitigation No Impact with Mitigation than Significant Less than Significant Comparable —Less than Greater — Less than Significant Similar and comparable — Less Land Use and Planning with Mitigation Significant with S with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Mitigation Less than Significant Greater — Significant and Lesser and comparable — Less Noise with Mitigation Lesser — No Impact Unavoidable than Significant with Mitigation Population and Housing Less than Significant Comparable — No Similar and comparable — Less Similar and comparable — Less Impact than Significant than Significant Public Services Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater — Less than Significant Similar and comparable — Less with Mitigation No Impact with Mitigation than Significant with Mitigation Travertine Draft EIR 7-42 October 2023 824 7.0 ALTERNATIVES Recreation Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Similar and comparable — Less Similar and comparable — Less No Impact than Significant than Significant Significant and Greater — Significant and Lesser — Less than Significant Transportation Unavoidable Lesser — No Impact Unavoidable with Mitigation Tribal Cultural Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater — Significant and Leser but comparable — Less Resources with Mitigation No Impact Unavoidable than Significant with Mitigation Utilities & Service Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Greater — Less than Significant Similar and comparable — Less Systems No Impact than Significant Wildfire Less than Significant Lesser but comparable — Comparable — Less than Similar and comparable — Less No Impact Significant than Significant Travertine Draft EIR 7-43 October 2023 825 Page intentionally blank 826 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 8.0 References Chapter 8.0 References Chapter 3.0 Project Description Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, SPA 2017-0004, April 2021. Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Used throughout DEIR La Quinta General Plan, https://www.laguintaca.gov/business/design-and-development/planning- division/2035-la-quinta-general-plan La Quinta General Plan EIR La Quint Municipal Code, https://Iibrary.municode.com/ca/la quinta/codes/municipal code Section 4.1 Aesthetics Development Design Manual, Coachella Valley Water District, May 2022, http://www.cvwd.org/DocumentCenter/View/4206/Development-Design-Manual-PDF?bidld= Integrated Resource Plan, Imperial Irrigation District, November 2018, https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/636927586520070000 State Scenic Highways, Caltrans, website accessed on April 8, 2021, https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap- liv-i-scenic-highways Streets and Highways Code — SHC; Division 1. State Highways, Chapter 2. The State Highway System, Article 2.5 State Scenic Highways, California Legislative Information, accessed May 2021, https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displayText.xhtml?lawCode=SHC&division=l.&tit le=&part=&chapter=2.&article=2.5. Section 4.2 Agricultural Resources and Forestry Resources Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soils Report, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), available at https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), California Department of Conservation (CDC), available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp Land Cover Mapping and Monitoring Program (LCMMP), California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 1992 through 2002, available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r5/communitVforests/?cid=fsbdev3 046700 Travertine Draft EIR 8-1 October 2023 827 8.0 REFERENCES Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment, Altum Group, 2018 Travertine Specific Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Update, TRG Land, 2021 Williamson Act Program, California Department of Conservation, available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/wa Section 4.3 Air Quality Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board, February 2010; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, Public Consultation Meeting Presentation by SCAQMD, September 25, 2020 Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard Fact Sheet, SCAQMD, September 2020 Draft 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), December 2022 Draft Coachella Valley Extreme Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, by SCAQMD, September 2020. Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003 Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2017 Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. Section 4.4 Biological Resources City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Chapter III Natural Resources, (May 2020, October 2022) https://www.laguintaca.gov/business/design-and-development/planning-division/2035-la- quinta-general-plan Coachella Valley Conservation Commission Joint Project Review Summary (February 2021) Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, May 2020, December 2022) https://cvmshcp.org/plan-documents/ CVMSHCP 2019 Annual Report (June 2020) CVMSHCP 2021 Annual Report (April 2022) https://cvmshcp.org/annual-reports/Annua1-Report- 2021.pdf Environmental Protection Agency, May 2020 https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary- endangered-species-act Travertine Draft EIR 8-2 October 2023 828 8.0 REFERENCES Offsite Utility Field Memo, Michael Baker International (July 2022) Travertine Project Biological Resources Analysis, Michael Baker International, (May 2022) Travertine Project Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (June 2021) Travertine Project Addendum to Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters, Michael Baker International (November 2021) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 2020 https://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/hcp- overview.html (May 2020) Section 4.5 Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation for the Travertine Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, September 2006. Phase I Report on Vineyard Acreage within Section 33 of the Proposed Travertine Development Project, prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, June 2007. Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, December 2017. Addendum to Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Land Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021.City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter III, Natural Resource Element, November 2013. Section 4.6 Energy Resources CARB, EMFAC2017 Web Database, available at https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/ California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, California Energy Commission, Demand Analysis Office, February 2018. California Public Utilities Commission, 2018 California Gas Report, pg 103. Corporate Average Fuel Economy, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy. California Climate Policy Fact Sheet: Renewables Portfolio Standard, UC Berkley Law, https://www.law.berkeleV.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Fact-Sheet-RPS.pdf California Energy Consumption Database, "Electricity Consumption by Planning Area", CEC; http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbVplan.aspx Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator— Calculations and CARB, EMFAC2017 Web Database, available at https:Harb.ca.gov/emfac/ Travertine Draft EIR 8-3 October 2023 829 8.0 REFERENCES Integrated Resource Plan, Imperial Irrigation District, November 2018, https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/6369275865200700001 accessed April 2021. Natural Gas and California, California Public Utilities Commission, https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural gas/, accessed August 2020. Service Area Plan 2020, Imperial Irrigation District, October 2020, https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18842, accessed April 2021. Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis, Urban Crossroads, November 2021. Section 4.7 Geology and Soils California Department of Conservation EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards Element, November 2013. County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521, Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Section 4.9), County of Riverside, 2015. Geotechnical Evaluation and Planning Study, Proposed Residential Development at Travertine, City of La Quinta, California, NMG Geotechnical, Inc., August 2021. Land Subsidence in the Coachella Valley, USGS, November 2018 Supplemental Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Travertine Development, SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, CVWD, July 2016, https://www.cvwd.org/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/516. Section 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board, February 2010 California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2019, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, 2021 Edition, California Air Resources Board, July 28, 2021 Press Release No. 18-37 & 19-35, California Air Resources Board Press Release, July 2018 and August 2019 Travertine Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Memorandum (AQ and GHG Memorandum), Urban Crossroads, January 31, 2023. Federal Clean Air Act (CWA) Travertine Draft EIR 8-4 October 2023 830 8.0 REFERENCES Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2017 Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency Bulletin, Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, accessed February 4, 2023 Section 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials GeoTracker, State Water Resources Control Board, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ accessed February 2022. Enforcement and Compliance History, Environmental Protection Agency, https://echo.epa.gov/facilities/facility-search/results, accessed February 2022. EnviroStor, Department of Toxic Substance Control, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed February 2022. Travertine Specific Plan, Avenue 60/Madison Street, La Quinta, CA, Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, prepared by Environmental Data Resources (EDR), May 2021. Section 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality City of La Quinta Master Drainage Plan, March 2009 City of La Quinta General Plan 2017, Flooding and Hydrology Section of the Environmental Hazards Element (Chapter 4), February 2013 Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/laws- regulations/summary-clean-water-act Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 06065C2900H, effective April 19, 2017 Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Plan. Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan, part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater Master Plan, April 2015 Travertine Development Drainage Master Plan (Drainage Master Plan), Q3 Consulting, November 10, 2020 Travertine Project Preliminary Hydrology Study for Tentative Tract Map 37387, Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc., November 2021 Travertine Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc., September 2021 Travertine Draft EIR 8-5 October 2023 831 8.0 REFERENCES Water Supply Assessment/Verification for the Travertine Specific Plan Project, The Altum Group, February 2018. Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Basin Plan), January 2019. Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the associated Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, effective June 20, 2013. 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan, December 2018. Section 4.11 Land Use and Planning City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter II, Land Use Element, November 2013. Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, 2016, available at https://cvmshcp.org/Plan-Documents/11-CVAG-MSHCP-Plan-Section-4-0.pdf La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, Zoning. 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, Southern California Association of Governments, https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-connect-soca1-2020 Section 4.12 Noise Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., April 2023. Travertine Specific Plan Off -Site Traffic Noise Mitigation Measure, Urban Crossroads, Inc., December 2022. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Federal Transit Administration, September 2018, available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research- innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no- 0123 O.pdf. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, September 2013, available at https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34120/CaItrans-2013-construction- vibration-PDF?bidld=. Section 4.13 Population and Housing American Community Survey (ACS) 2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles, available at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs California Department of Finance (DOF), E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2021 with 2010 Census Benchmark, located at http://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ Travertine Draft EIR 8-6 October 2023 832 8.0 REFERENCES California Department of Finance (DOF), E-8 Historical Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 1990-2000, August 2007, located at http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-8/ California Legislative Information, Government Code, Title 7 Planning and Land Use, Division 1, Planning and Zoning, January 2018, available at https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNu m=tiSSRn Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Profile of the City of La Quinta — Local Profiles Report 2019, May 2019, available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/laguinta local profile.pdf?1606013533 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Strategic Plan, October 2018, available at http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/StrategicPlanBookletlores.pdf SCAG 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy, September 2020, available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal- plan O.Ddf?1606001176 United States Census Bureau, 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, Employment Status, available at https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/isf/pages/productview.xhtmI?src=bkmk US EPA, EnviroAtlas, Employment to Housing Ratio, November 2014, available at https://enviroatIas.epa.gov/enviroatlas/DataFactSheets/pdf/Supplemental/EmpIoVmentHousin gRatio.pdf Section 4.14 Public Services California Department of Parks and Recreation, Quimby Act, 2022. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Update, May 2013. City of La Quinta Development Impact Fee Study, August 2019. City of La Quinta / City Departments / Police Department Website City of La Quinta / Parks Website Kohl Hetrick, Fire Safety Specialist La Quinta / Email Correspondence, September 2022 Lieutenant Andres Martinez, La Quinta Police Department / Email Correspondence, October 2022 Resolution No. 2020-003; Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, City of La Quinta, September 2019; adopted February 2020. Travertine Draft EIR E October 2023 833 8.0 REFERENCES 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 5, 2020. Section 4.15 Recreation La Quinta City Website, Hiking, available at https://www.playinlaquinta.com/see-do/hiking/ Lake Cahuilla Veterans Regional Park, Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District, available at https://www.rivcoparks.org/lake-cahuilla-veterans-regional-par Resolution 2020 — 003, Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, September 2019, adopted February 2020, available at https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument?id=43794. Section 4.16 Transportation Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), Urban Crossroads, Inc., November 2020. Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation, Urban Crossroads, Inc., November 2020. Section 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for The Travertine Development; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, December 2017. Addendum to Supplemental Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Travertine Land Development Project; prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants, November 2021. Section 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems CalRecylce Estimated Solid Wase Generation Rates, CalRecycle, https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates#Residential. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Chapter V, Public Infrastructure and Services, Riverside County EIR No. 52, Public Facilities, Section 4.17. Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water and Management Planning Website http://cvwd.org/543/Urban-Water-Management-Planning. Coachella Valley Water District 2019-2020 Annual Report https://www.cvwd.org/blog.aspx?iid=15 County of Riverside Environmental Impact Report No. 521 Public Review Draft February 2015 https://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/14/genplan/general plan 2015/DEIR%20521/04- 17 PublicFacilities.pdf. Environmental Protection Agency, RecycleMania Volume -to -Weight Conversion Chart https://archive.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/tools/rogo/web/pdf/volume-weight-conversions.pdf. Travertine Draft EIR 8-8 October 2023 834 8.0 REFERENCES Riverside County Department of Waste Resources.https://www.rcwaste.org/business/planning/ciwmp. Section 4.19 Wildfire City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Plan, Part I: Basic Plan, May 2010, available at http://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showdocument?id=12446 Conservation Practice Specifications, Fuel Break - Code 383, Natural Resources Conservation Service, available at https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/CO/CO383 Spec.pdf Imperial Irrigation District SB 901 Wildfire Mitigation Plan 2020 — 2022, September 2019, available at https://www.iid.com/home/showdocument?id=17951 La Quinta General Plan, Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards, available at https://lagIaserweb.Iaguintaca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=561914&dbid=l&repo=CityofLa Quinta&cr=1 National Weather Service "Post Wildfire Flash Flood and Debris Flow Guide", https://streetsla.lacity.org/sites/default/files/DebrisFIowSurvivaIGuide.pdf Post -Fire Flooding and Debris Flow, USGS California Water Science Center, available at https://www.usgs.gov/centers/ca-water/science/post-fire-flooding-and-debris-flow?qt- science center obiects=0#qt-science center objects) Travertine Draft EIR :• October 2023 835 Page intentionally blank 836 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Travertine Specific Plan et al, La Quinta CA 9.0 Glossary of Terms Chapter 9.0 Glossary of Terms AB Assembly Bill ABOP Antifreeze, Batteries, Oil, Paint ACBCI Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ADI Area of Direct Impacts ADT Average Daily Traffic AFY Acre -Feet per Year AMM Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation amsl Above Mean Sea Level APE Area of Potential Effects AQMP Air Quality Management Plan ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials BA Biological Assessment BACM Best Available Dust Control Measures BLM Bureau of Land Management BMP Best Management Practices BO Biological Opinion BOR Bureau of Reclamation BTU British Thermal Unit CAA Clean Air Act CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAC Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner CDNPA California Desert Native Plants Act CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy CALGreen California's Green Building Standards CaIEPA California Environmental Protection Agency Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-1 October 2023 837 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator ModelTM CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Cal-IPC California Invasive Plant Council Caltrans California Department of Transportation CAP Climate Action Plan CAPCOA California Air Pollution Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board CASQA California Stormwater Quality Association CBC California Building Code CcC Carrizo stony sand CCR California Code of Regulations CDA California Department of Agriculture CdC Carsitas gravelly sand CDCA California Desert Conservation Area CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEC California Energy Commission CERP Community Emissions Reduction Plan CESA California Endangered Species Act CEQA California Environmental Quality Act cf Cubic feet CFGC Californian Fish and Game Code CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGP Construction General Permit CH4 Methane CHP California Highway Patrol CIP Capital Improvement Program CIRP California Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board CLOMR Conditional Letter of Map Revision CMA Congestion Management Agency Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-2 October 2023 838 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS CMP Congestion Management Plan CMS Congestion Management System CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level CNLM Center for Natural Lands Management CNPS California Native Plant Society CO Carbon Monoxide CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CUP Conditional Use Permit CUPA California Certified Unified Program Agencies CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments CVCC Coachella Valley Conservation Commission CVMSHCP Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan CVSC Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel CVSIP Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan CVUSD Coachella Valley Unified School District CVWD Coachella Valley Water District CWA Clean Water Act CWA Coachella Water Authority cy Cubic yards DA Development Agreement dBA A -weighted decibel DEH Riverside County Department of Environmental Health DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report DIF Development Impact Fee DMP Drainage Master Plan DOC Department of Conservation DOF Department of Finance Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-3 October 2023 839 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS DOSH Division of Occupational Safety and Health DPR Department of Pesticide Regulation DSUSD Desert Sands Unified School District DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control DWA Desert Water Agency DWR California Department of Water Resources DWQ Department of Water Quality EA Environmental Assessment ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Online ECV Eastern Coachella Valley ECVCP Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan EIC Eastern Information Center EIR Environmental Impact Report EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 EMFAC Emissions Factors Model EO Executive Order EOC Emergency Operations Center EOP Emergency Operations Plan EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPO Environmental Protection and Oversight Division ESA Environmental Site Assessment ESA Environmentally Sensitive Areas EV Electric Vehicle EVA Emergency Vehicle Access FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FESA Endangered Species Act FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones FHWA Federal Highway Administration FICON Federal Interagency Committee on Noise FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-4 October 2023 840 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS FMP Fire Master Plan FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program FRA Federal Responsibility Area FRAP Fire and Resources Assessment Program FTA Federal Transit Administration GCC Global Climate Change GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information Systems GO General Order GPA General Plan Amendment GPS Global Positioning System GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan GWh Gigawatt Hours HCP Habitat Conservation Plans HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbons HFC Hydrofluorocarbons HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program HMERT Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team HMMP Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan HOA Homeowners Association Hp Horsepower HSC Health and Safety Code HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning Hz Hertz 1-10 Interstate 10 IID Imperial Irrigation District IRP Integrated Resource Plan IRP Inventory of Rare Plants ISO Independent System Operator Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-5 October 2023 841 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers IWA Indio Water Authority JD Jurisdictional Delineation JPR Joint Project Review kV kiloVolt LAQMP Local Air Quality Management Plan LCC Land Capability Class LE Land Evaluation LESA Land Evaluation and Site Assessment LDR Low Density Residential LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan LID Low Impact Development LOMAR Letter of Map Revision LOS Level of Service LQGP La Quinta General Plan LAMP La Quinta Municipal Code LRA Local Responsibility Area LSAA Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement LSEV Low -Speed Electric Vehicles LST Local Significance Threshold LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank MaB Myoma fine sand MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mgd Million Gallons Per Day MMRD Martinez Mountain Rockslide District MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMT Million Metric Tones MMTCO2e Million Metric Tones of Carbon Dioxide emissions MS4 Permit Whitewater River Region Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit MTCO2e Metric Tones of Carbon Dioxide emissions Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-6 October 2023 842 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NAP Not a Part (of Project) NCCPA Natural Community Conservation Planning Act NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NEV Neighborhood Electric Vehicles NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NIMS National Incident Management System NMA Neighborhood Mobility Area NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPPA Native Plant Protection Act N20 Nitrous Oxide NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide NOAA National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration NOC Notice of Completion NOP Notice of Preparation NOT Notice of Termination NOx Nitrogen Oxide NRHP National Register of Historic Places NSPS New Source Performance Standards NWPR Navigable Waters Protection Rule 03 Ozone OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment OES Office of Emergency Services OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark OMP Operations and Maintenance Plan Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-7 October 2023 843 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS OPR Office of Planning and Research OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PA Planning Area Pb Lead PBS Peninsular bighorn sheep PDF Project Design Feature PEC/REC Potential/Recognized Environmental Conditions PERP Portable Equipment Registration Program PFC perfluorocarbons PFYC Potential Fossil Yield Classification PMio/ PM2.5 Particulate Matter (10 Microns / 2.5 Microns) PPV Peak Particle Velocity PRC Public Resources Code PWS Public Water System PV Photovoltaic RCDWR Riverside County Department of Waste Resources RCEM Road Construction Emissions Model RCFC&WCD Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District RCFD Riverside County Fire Department RCGP Riverside County General Plan RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission RFS Renewable Fuel Standard RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation RIVTAM Riverside Transportation Analysis Model RMS Root Mean Squared RO Rock Outcrop ROG Reactive Organic Gas ROW Right -of -Way Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-8 October 2023 844 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS RPW Relatively Permanent Waters RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program RTP Regional Transportation Plan RU Rubble Land RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SB Senate Bill SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SED Socioeconomic data SEMS Standardized Emergency Manamgent System SF Square Feet SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer SIP State Implementation Plan SMP Soil Management Plan S02 Sulfur Dioxide SOI Sphere of Influence SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company) SOX Sulfur Oxides SP Specific Plan SPA Specific Plan Amendment SRA Source Receptor Areas SRA State Responsibility Area Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-9 October 2023 845 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS SRSJM Santa Rosa San Jacinto Mountain SSAB Salton Sea Air Basin SSC Species of Special Concern SSMP Sanitary Sewer Management Plan STC Sound Transmission Class SWGP Stormwater Grant Program SWP State Water Project SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board SWRP Stormwater Resource Plan TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone TCR Tribal Cultural Resources TDM Transportation Demand Management TIA Traffic Impact Analysis THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Officer TMDCI Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians TNW Traditional Navigable Waters tpd Tons per day TRI Toxics Release Inventory TTM Tentative Tract Map TUMF Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee UBC Uniform Building Code UWMP Urban Water Management Plan USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey UWMPA Urban Water Management Planning Act VHFSZ Very High Fire Severity Zone Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-10 October 2023 846 9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOC Volatile Organic Compounds VPH Vehicle per hour VRM Visual Resource Management WDR Waste Discharge Requirements WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) WL State Watch List WOTUS Waters of the United States WQMP Water Quality Management Plan WRPs Water Reclamation Plants WSA Water Supply Assessment WSV Water Supply Verification WUI Wildland Urban Interface ZC Zone Change ZOI Zone of Influence Travertine Draft EIR Page 9-11 October 2023 847 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024 - XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF 1,200 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 100 ROOM HOTEL ON 855 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET CASE NUMBERS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE APPLICANT: TRG LAND INC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on May 28, 2024, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by TRG Land, Inc. for approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, and Development Agreement for a master planned community on 855 acres located south of Avenue 60, north of Avenue 64, and west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: APNs 766-110-003, -004, -007, and -009; 766-120-001, -002, -003, -006, -015, -016, -018, -021, and -023; 753-040-014, 016, and -017; 753-050-007, and -029; 753-060-003; 764- 280-057, -059, and -061 WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 2024, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the site, and emailed or mailed to all interested parties who have requested notification relating to the project; and General Plan Amendment 2017-0002 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said General Plan Amendment [Exhibit A, B, C]: 848 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 2 OF 7 1. The map amendment is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan as outlined in Exhibit C. 2. Approval of the General Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare because the community will be entirely self-contained and of high quality, and will include homes, a resort and associated amenities, recreational facilities (parks, trails, golf facility), and perimeter improvements and streets consistent and complementary to improvements surrounding the site. 3. The proposed Land Use designations are compatible with the designations on adjacent properties, as the project incorporates largely residential uses in a largely residential area with complementary commercial and recreational uses. 4. The proposed Land Use designations are suitable and appropriate for the subject property, as they are similar to those currently allowed on the affected parcels. 5. Approval of the General Plan Amendment is warranted because the configuration of uses has changed to address environmental constraints as a result of follow-up technical studies for the site as required by the original Travertine Environmental Impact Report, and consistency with the conceptual plan for the project is required. Zone Change 2017-0002 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said Zone Change [Exhibit D]: 1. The Zone Change is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, as described above. 2. Approval of the Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare because the community will be entirely self-contained and of high quality, and will include homes, a resort and associated amenities, recreational facilities (parks, trails, golf facility), and perimeter improvements and streets consistent and complementary to improvements surrounding the site. 3. The Zone Change is compatible with the zoning on adjacent properties as it continues the pattern of master planned communities envisioned in the General Plan for southern areas of La Quinta. 849 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 3 OF 7 4. The Zone Change is suitable and appropriate for the subject property because the same land uses as currently permitted will be developed. 5. Approval of the Zone Change is warranted because the configuration of uses has changed to address environmental constraints as a result of follow-up technical studies for the site as required by the original Travertine Environmental Impact Report, and consistency with the conceptual plan for the project is required. Specific Plan 2017-0004 WHEREAS, the effective Specific Plan for the Travertine property, SP1994-026, was approved by the City Council in June 1995 pursuant to Resolution 1995-039 and was approved for a time extension in July 1999, by the Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution 1999-061; and WHEREAS, Specific Plan 2017-0004 will repeal and replace the SP1994-026 and become the effective Specific Plan for the Travertine property; and 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 Specific Plan [Exhibit E]: 1. The proposed SP2017-0004 is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan, as described above. 2. Approval Specific Plan 2017-0004 will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare because the community will be entirely self-contained and of high quality, and will include homes, a resort and associated amenities, recreational facilities (parks, trails, golf facility), and perimeter improvements and streets consistent and complementary to improvements surrounding the site. 3. Specific Plan 2017-0004 is compatible with zoning on nearby properties, which also allows residential planned communities. 4. Specific Plan 2017-0004 is suitable and appropriate for the subject property, as the same land uses as currently permitted will be developed. 850 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 4 OF 7 Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map [Exhibit F]: 1. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, as amended, and implements the Low Density Residential, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial and Open Space land use designations allowed on the site. 2. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the La Quinta General Plan with the implementation of recommended conditions of approval. 3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, nor substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The Draft EIR found that impacts to the environment could be reduced to less than significant levels, with the exception of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. The City has determined that the benefits of the project outweigh the impacts to these resources, to be identified in the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. 4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, insofar as the map will be required to comply with all laws, standards and requirements associated with sanitary sewer collection, water quality, and other public health issues in subsequent maps, site development permits, and other approvals necessary for development of the land. 5. The site of the proposed subdivision is suitable for the density and type of development proposed. The reduction of units from the existing land uses to the new land uses is more suitable for the subject property. 6. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with all applicable provisions of Title 13 of the City's Subdivision Regulations Code, minimum lot area requirements, and other applicable provisions of Title 9 of the City's Zoning Code, and the Subdivision Map Act and the proposed Specific Plan. 7. The design and improvements required for the Tentative Tract Map 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. 851 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 5 OF 7 Development Agreement 2021-0001 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said Development Agreement [Exhibit GI: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan and the proposed Specific Plan. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed in the proposed Specific Plan and implements the Specific Plan's design features. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public necessity, public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practices because it will provide for public facilities and improvements that will benefit the project and the surrounding area. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare, as it provides for the long-term orderly development of a master planned community. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values insofar as it will ensure that development occurring on the site will assure high quality development and generate revenues. 6. The Development Agreement will have a positive fiscal impact on the city by providing residences which will generate property tax revenue and by allowing Tourist Commercial uses and short-term vacation rentals which will generate Transient Occupancy Tax and Sales Tax revenues. WHEREAS, Senate Bill 330 and amendments to Government Code Section 65863 (sometimes referred to as the state's "No Net Loss Law") does not allow a city to "downzone" or otherwise approve a development policy, standard, or condition for a housing development project that results in a general plan designation, specific plan designation, or zoning of a parcel or parcels to a "less intensive use" below what was allowed under the land use designation or zoning ordinances in effect on January 1, 2018; and 852 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 6 OF 7 WHEREAS, the Travertine project is considered a housing development per Government Code Section 65589.5 (h)(2); and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 330, expressly exempts from its limitations and requirements, among other criteria, the adoption or amendment of a development policy, standard, or condition (such as a general plan designation, specific plan designation, or zone change) in a manner that implements mitigation measures necessary to comply with CEQA. (Gov. Code, § 66300(e)(3)(D), formerly § 66300(h)(1).) The Travertine project implements mitigation measures necessary to comply with various state -agency imposed mandates to comply with CEQA; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 330 does not prevent the adoption of the proposed project approvals, as referenced in the Travertine Project Exemption Findings [Exhibit H]; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 330 does not prevent the adoption of the proposed project approvals because none of the project area includes sites to accommodate the City's low - and moderate -income housing allocation, as listed in the current (and HCD-certified) Housing Element's inventory of sites, adopted to comply with the current cycle for the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 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 Findingsof the Planning Commission in this case. SECTION 2. That the above project is consistent with EA 2019-0010, Travertine Project Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2021020310). SECTION 3. That it does hereby recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2017-0002, Zone Change 2017-0002, Specific Plan Amendment 2017-0004, Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) and Development Agreement 2021-0001 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval [Exhibit 1]. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on May 28, 2024, by the following vote: 853 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002; ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002; SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 (TTM 37387); DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0001 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 7 OF 7 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEPHEN T. NIETO, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DANNY CASTRO, Design and Development Director City of La Quinta, California 854 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT A Existing General Plan Designations F�is+i �aen4anF fan ed �ener�ll Plael I I CORAL -AA,C , r General Plan Des: nsnrn Acres Unit4 Asses UHL. Low Density Residential 392.2 1326 ama 75S Medlum {High Residendal U.A 774 60.91 442 Towdst Canrnegpal -W.9 94.5 GCtnSpack- Necresuon 369A 55,9 9"rk5 o-mbAhrl 11.2 30L,2 General CoarrmnlaI W.0 hrlasler Planned Raedtwla W.1 35.0 Kasai 1 946:2 23r-p 1240 ]Ull[i1�J1 VAE 4 4s .- _ .may %1 Vci1S�E da - A I , I C! I� Laly NgVitp Widonlol 7puftU {rmnalool — • Yf4pG2etl 309DR PI3h 5"rdgY kkawmaligh C4nadp Rmidzmha! dpae Soece - R"icamn tyAlhng Spp¢d{;'IaP ikwu wy I,'.gnpr{I' �vTr4grba! 855 Proposed General Plan Designations Existing6Emaral Plan Proposed -General Plan GeriFig1 Pan Desirptip1 ALCfA!+ units AEres UVO15 Low bfns4y Reslda-m iak M2,2 LS29 M-0 758 MedlumIMFghResidentia1 84.4 774 60.8 442 TOw 5# Commerciat 319 84.5 Open 5paCe - ikerreailan 365.3 55.4 Open Spar-e 43 wral 32.2 301.2 Major Commurity FaMIles% 4-1 GeneT;d Comrmrcial 10.0 Mas#er�IannedRoadma s 211 35.0 Total 405.2 230:' E55.d 1200 � r 1sfi�aui Ul iri Pue Ir r _ I ��� • _ g4E7.i� Cn m'e �EvE!G} WWO—OkY No - I LVRn 4R;R-pasrwrK Pm al 4pur is WRn boxndoiy Meihuo!High Genslls?eoct-mv upal-:axr 4aum] Ti)nll Yl C;Mrrf M.lnl 856 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT B Existing • Madison, Jefferson and Avenue 62 as Modified Secondary Highway • Crossing Dike 4 — 88' Right -of -Way sphere15fInt7urnce PrimaryArf riai Se(l dOFyAFttFiOl �a�i#�ed 5erandar� �a�feclor}4ri5�r�od Llrborrli�'fprraf Proposed • Removal of Madison south of Avenue 60 • Realignment of Jefferson Street • k ° 0 857 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT C Statement and Consistencv with General Plan Statement: As a part of the Travertine Development, the City will consider the approval of this General Plan Amendment that proposes changing certain aspects of the City's General Plan land use and circulation designations in order to provide for the development of the proposed amended Travertine Specific Plan. This General Plan Amendment would enable the City to implement revised circulation and infrastructure alternatives intended to convey the vision for the Travertine Specific Plan area. This amendment proposes modifications to the General Plan Land Use Map and the General Plan Roadway Classifications exhibit. No text changes to the General Plan are proposed. This application requests the following: • Modify the General Plan Land Use Map, as follows, 1. Modify the existing areas and locations of land use designations at the project site with the following designations: Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Open Space - Recreation, Open Space Natural. 2. Removal of the 10 acre General Commercial designation within the Travertine development area. • Modify the General Plan Roadway Classifications exhibit, as follows, 3. The termination of the Madison Street extension as a General Plan Roadway from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62. 4. The realignment of the Jefferson Street extension to be consistent with the alignment proposed in the Travertine Development. In conjunction with this application, an Environmental Impact Report, Amendment to the Specific Plan, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Development Agreement, and a Fire Master Plan are currently being prepared for the Travertine development. An assessment of the proposed Amendment's consistency with applicable General Plan goals, policies and programs is provided below. General Plan Consistencv: Land Use • GOAL LU-1 Land use compatibility throughout the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides diverse and high -quality housing, tourist commercial, resort and spa, skills golf course with club facilities, and park and recreation opportunities that meet the needs of its residents and bring tourism to the City. The Travertine Specific Plan establishes and maintains connections between existing neighborhoods and the Specific Plan neighborhoods. 858 • GOAL LU-2 High quality design that complements and enhances the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides many high -quality design elements that will ensure the following: a wide array of residential housing; integrates recreational uses; provides tourist commercial uses, preserves open space, and protects scenic views. • GOAL LU-3 Safe and identifiable neighborhoods that provide a sense of place. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan incorporates design guidelines that will ensure high quality architecture and landscaping. The residential enclaves will be cohesive in design and character and recreational facilities will be consistent with their surrounding neighborhood. The master -planned community of Travertine is designed to complement the surrounding development in the area, incorporating residential, tourist commercial, open space, and park areas into a cohesive plan complementary to uses in the vicinity of the project. This Specific Plan is designed such that compatible land uses, open space areas, landscaped manufactured slopes, and elevation changes serve as buffers between the planned Travertine community and surrounding open space land uses. • GOAL LU-5 A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides a mix of housing types that include medium, and low -density housing types, designed with enhanced architecture and landscaping, and access to pedestrian walkways, providing a walkable community for the residents. Circulation • GOAL CIR-2 A circulation system that promotes and enhances transit, alternative vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian systems. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan provides a master planned roadway system with a network of bicycle/pedestrian pathways designed to meet the needs of residents, safely and efficiently transport people and goods, and accommodate the projected residential growth within the community. Livable Community • GOAL SC-1 A community that provides the best possible quality of life for all its residents. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides a master planned community that includes over 357 acres of open space (including natural, passive and active areas) which is served by a network of pedestrian, bike and hiking trails, will connect residents and 859 TRAVERTINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION visitors to amenities to meet both active and passive needs. Residents will also have two community parks as well as localized pocket parks within neighborhoods. Visitors and residents will have access to a golf academy, and resort/ spa facilities. Residences will be designed in conformance with high architectural standards. CEC Energy Efficient Standards (CBC Title 24) will be required for all residential and non-residential uses. Solarsystems, both passive and active will take advantage of the year-round abundant sunshine. Green Building technology will be promoted to improve resource efficiency in the residential and tourist serving commercial uses. Economic Development • GOAL ED-1 A balanced and varied economic base which provides the City a fiscal stability to the City, and a broad range of goods and services to its residents and the region. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan includes tourist commercial uses that will accommodate and attract residents of the city and visitors, offer new employment opportunities, and contribute to a strong and diversified economic base. The project developer will pay its reasonable fair -share of impact fees and improvement costs to fund the infrastructure improvements and other public facilities necessary to service the planned development • GOAL ED-2 The continued growth of the tourism and Resort/Spa industries in the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan allows for resident and tourist commercial uses that complement and support one another and will help maintain a strong sales and property tax base. The tourist commercial components of the Specific Plan will promote transient occupancy tax, retail, restaurants, and other support uses in a pedestrian friendly environment which will enhance the fiscal growth potential and real estate values of the City and the Travertine community. Parks. Recreation and Trails • GOAL PR-1 A comprehensive system of parks and recreation facilities and services that meet the active and passive needs of all residents and visitors. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will provide many recreational opportunities, including: two community parks (totaling approximately 13 acres), 6 miles of walkable trails that circumnavigate the community and an additional 5 miles of trails interior to the project providing for a walkable community for the residents. Residential development areas will also have additional localized pocket park areas within the neighborhoods. On -street bike lanes will make it convenient to ride around the project for exercise and local transportation. A Class II bikeway will be constructed on the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 as well as the Loop Streets for the use and enjoyment of La Quinta residents. These amenities will also provide access to the projects, 55.9 acres of recreational open space, and 301 acres of natural open space (including the 152 acres of habitat preservation), as well as the resort/spa and the golf academy. 860 TRAVERTINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Housing • GOAL H-1 Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City's existing and projected population. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan is designed to provide a range of housing types and densities at varying price points that will help meet the anticipated demand for housing within different economic segments of the City. • GOAL H-5 Provide equal housing opportunities for all persons. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan developer will encourage the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and in the for -sale or rental housing. • GOAL H-6 Provide a regulatory framework that facilitates and encourages energy and water conservation through sustainable site planning, project design, and green technologies and building materials. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan incorporates sustainable design strategies that promote energy and water conservation measures. The project is designed to control water runoff and avoid contamination of water resources. All HOA maintained landscaped areas will be designed in a water -efficient manner and drought tolerant plants will be used throughout the individual neighborhoods, the resort/spa and golf course. Title 24 compliance is required for all construction. Air Quality • GOAL AQ-1 A reduction of air emissions generated within the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will expand routes for golf carts and neighborhood electric vehicles, and plan for accessing and recharging facilities at the resort/spa and the golf academy facility. The plan provides an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of paths, approximately 11 miles of such trails in addition to the on -street bike lanes that will be provided, to allow safe and convenient access to recreational and community facilities. Proposed development air quality emissions and greenhouse gas emissions shall be analyzed under CEQA and adhere to the City's GHG Reduction Plan. All construction activities will minimize emission of all air quality pollutants, grading activities shall adhere to established fugitive dust criteria. The project will implement the air quality mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. 861 TRAVERTINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Ener.Rv and Mineral Resources • GOAL EM-2 The conservation and thoughtful management of local mineral deposits to assure the long- term viability of limited resources. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will preserve any local mineral resources identified by the Department of Mines and Geology and to the greatest extent possible designate those undeveloped lands as Open Space. The project will implement mineral deposit resource mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR if necessary. Biological Resources • GOAL 1310-1 The protection and preservation of native and environmentally significant biological resources and their habitats. Consistency Analysis: The project has designated 152 acres of protected habitat area along the southern, western, and eastern boundaries of the site. This preserve area will protect known biological resources, including the important habitat for the Bighorn Sheep. The project will implement biological resource mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. The designated habitat area also includes areas of cultural resources to be protected. Cultural Resources • GOAL CUL-1 The protection of significant archaeological, historic, and paleontological resources occur in the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will preserve any significant archaeological and historic resources to the greatest extent possible. The project has been redesigned to preserve all nine cultural resources identified that are within or intersect the project. The project will implement mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. Water Resources • GOAL WR-1 Support the Coachella Valley Water District in its efforts to supply adequate domestic water to residents and businesses. Consistency Analysis: The project will utilize drought tolerant landscaping on all HOA maintained slopes and parkways. The resort/wellness center and the golf academy and its facilities will predominately use water wise landscaping and judicially reduce the use of turf in the golf skills course area. Open Space and Conservation • GOAL OS-1 Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreation, environmental and economic purposes. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine plan preserves 301 acres for habitat and natural 862 TRAVERTINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION preservation purposes. The vistas of the Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountain and other scenic resources will not be disrupted. Noise • GOAL N-1 A healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and Resort/Spa character. Consistency Analysis: The project complements the City's residential and Resort/Spa character. The project EIR addresses the potential impacts of noise associated with the proposed development. The Specific Plan will incorporate appropriate design measures and adhere to all applicable restrictions and requirements identified in the EIR to ensure that the potential impacts are mitigated to below a level of significance Soils and Geology • GOAL GEO-1 Protection of the residents' health and safety, and of their property, from geologic and seismic hazards. Consistency Analysis: The project EIR addresses the potential impacts of natural hazards associated with the proposed development. The Specific Plan will incorporate appropriate design measures and adhere to all applicable restrictions and requirements identified in the EIR to ensure that the potential impacts are mitigated to below a level ofsignificance. Flooding and Hydrology • GOAL FH-1 Protection of the health and safety, and welfare of the community from flooding and hydrological hazards. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan includes preservation and avoidance of the larger areas related to the identified Middle North and Middle South storm flows to address flooding concerns. Additionally, development has been sufficiently set back from the natural water courses to assure adequate protection of life, property, and habitat values. A reinforced flood protection barrier along the western and southern edge of development will provide flood protection for flows from the adjacent open space and directing the flows to downstream off -site areas along Dike No. 4 and the Guadalupe Dike thereby protecting the project from off -site flows. Hazardous Materials • GOAL HAZ-1 Protection of residents from the potential impacts of hazardous and toxic materials. Consistency Analysis: Development of the project will be evaluated in the EIR and the project will implement all measures identified in the project EIR to protect the residents'safety from potential impacts from hazardous and toxic material. 863 TRAVERTINE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Emergency Services • GOAL ES-1 An effective and comprehensive response to all emergency service needs. Consistency Analysis: Fire protection and emergency response services to the Specific Plan Area will be provided by the City and County. The service levels of fire and police protection needed to adequately serve the Travertine community will be identified and addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. Although Madison Street, south of Avenue 60, would be removed as a public right of way, it will be improved as an emergency vehicle accessway (EVA) for access into the Travertine community. During the phased construction of the community, interim solutions have been identified and will be implemented to ensure required access for fire and emergency services will be available at all times. Water Sewer & Other Utilities • GOAL UTL-1 Domestic water facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and long-term needs of the City. Consistency Analysis: The domestic water needs will be provided by Coachella Valley Water District. The water assessment analysis for the Travertine community will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. • GOAL UTL-2 Sanitary sewer facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and long-term needs of the City. Consistency Analysis: The sewer needs and facilities will be provided by Coachella Valley Water District. The sewer services assessment analysis for the Travertine community will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. 864 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT D % I -f I r .I. -Jr .1 LL,w Dumity R L6iue rci ii 3E2.2 L Mrd-um Dmr.:ii Ey Res i6ential meoNm I 64igF. Rion; mcrotLa 94.4 WigHour-hr3nd L1.0muW6al 111.0 1.3Ur-.5t Cr)nvn;rriipl 10.9 5di UWriP .Open Space .1 1 jW5t9r;ManrieC 20.1 1 1 Ell .31 qqq.? C. -Taj h1l MIL11AW 4 wH P�mly no-*i-o rwisi Corqrmu* Prrpueed SDearic Paw Bisundwy kt&inlliqhDcnmtlRcud!r-m GOP Caine Evilling ecllly F-W cLVUMpry E= llw0Wfhv.d Urn-amal ch.# 5"m 865 • - }�- f Y � �� III i! _ I� _ - C,�4YAti '? �Y�i111� I f I �I NA? Pt sed ZEKI i'lan Zoning Acres Unks Low Deo$ity Residential 32.0 759 Meidi4m Density Reslderlift 5UI8 442 Medicm f Hlgh Residential Neighborhood Cofer-cial Tourist Commercial 84,5 Ualf Cailrw Open Space 357,1 Mas-wr Planned Roodways 35.0 Tvta k 855.4 1200 x': =•.Y:T dd — � 4 i' � 1if-La-lFsa� �II S ti 16 LEGEND 4� Low Denndy R9D&mi lel ]pen $ qe 0 pr%-"Eed Spec& plan t aundery hbdb4m Dq—ly Rorjdmpile! 866 _ iwpFi-covmuclal r-, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT E LralT . n TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - OCTOBER 27, 2023 Draft City of La Quinta 78-4795 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 867 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 868 TABLE OF CONTENTS ] Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose and Intent.......................................................................................................1-1 1r2 Authority and Requirements.........................................................................................1-1 1.3 Specific Plan Amendment Components.........................................................................1-2 1.4 Project Description.......................................................................................................1-3 1.4.1 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses.......................................................................1-6 1.5 Project Objectives.......................................................................................................1-10 1.6 Existing Conditions.....................................................................................................1-10 1.7 Project Site History.....................................................................................................1-11 1.7.1 Required Additional Studies After Specific Plan Approval...................................................1-11 1.8 Relationship to the City General Plan..........................................................................1-15 1.8.1 Land Use Element............................................................................................................1-15 1.8.2 Circulation Element..........................................................................................................1-18 1.9 Zoning Map Amendment............................................................................................1-19 2 Land Use......................................................................................................................................................2-1 2.L Project Description and Summary................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Land Use Plan Description.................................................................................................2-1 2.1.2 Open Space........................................................................................................................2-4 2.1.3 Recreational Trails..............................................................................................................2-4 2.1.4 Roadways...........................................................................................................................2-6 2.1.5 Residential..........................................................................................................................2-6 2.1.6 Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities.............................................................................2-10 2.2 Development Regulations & Standards.......................................................................2-11 2.2.1 Low Density Residential- Planning Areas 3-5, 7, 8, 10, & 12-16......................................2-11 2.3.2 Medium Density Residential — Planning Areas 2, 6, and 9...............................................2-13 2.3.3 Resort (Tourist Commercial) — Planning Areas 1 and 11.................................................2-14 2.3.5 Natural Open Space/Restricted Open Space — Planning Area 20....................................2-16 3 Design Guidelines........................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Purpose and Intent.......................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Introduction.................................................................................................................3-1 3.3 Theme..........................................................................................................................3-1 34 Architectural Design Elements......................................................................................3-2 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 869 3.4.1 Color...................................................................................................................................3-3 3.4.2 Materials............................................................................................................................3-3 3.5 Landscape Design Elements........................................................................................3-12 3.5.1 Main Community and Gates Entries................................................................................3-15 3.5.2 Typical Entry Landscape and Monumentation................................................................3-15 3.5.3 Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 streetscape..........................................................................3-19 3.5.4 Loop Road Streetscape....................................................................................................3-19 3.5.5 Residential Streetscape....................................................................................................3-19 3.5.6 Parcel Landscape Open Space..........................................................................................3-23 3.5.7 Community Slope.............................................................................................................3-23 3.5.8 Open Space and Edge Conditions....................................................................................3-23 3.5.9 On -Street, Off -Street and Strolling Trails.........................................................................3-27 3.5.10 Public Hiking Trails...........................................................................................................3-27 3.5.11 Community West and East Parks.....................................................................................3-31 3.5.12 Resort and Spa.................................................................................................................3-34 3.5.13 Golf Academy / Practice Facility......................................................................................3-36 3.5.14 Typical Fences and Walls.................................................................................................3-37 3.5.15 Landscape Cross-Sections................................................................................................3-40 3.5 Planting Zones............................................................................................................3-49 3.7 Plant Material Guidelines...........................................................................................3-49 4 Infrastructure Plan.......................................................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Circulation Plan Description..........................................................................................4-1 43 Water...........................................................................................................................4-9 4..5 Sewer.........................................................................................................................4-11 4.4 Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan........................................................................4-13 4.4.1 Drainage Plan...................................................................................................................4-16 4.4.2 Stormwater Management Plan........................................................................................4-18 4.4.3 Grading Plan.....................................................................................................................4-18 4..5 Utilities......................................................................................................................4-19 4,5 Public Facilities & Services..........................................................................................4-20 4.6.1 Solid Waste......................................................................................................................4-20 4.6.2 Fire Protection..................................................................................................................4-20 4.6.3 Police Protection..............................................................................................................4-21 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 870 4.6.4 Community Services & Facilities......................................................................................4-21 4.6.5 Recreation........................................................................................................................4-21 5 Implementation Measures and Administration...........................................................................................5-1 5.1 Procedures...................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Financing Plan..............................................................................................................5-1 5.3 Maximum Allowable Development...............................................................................5-1 SAStatistical Table............................................................................................................5-2 5.5 Determination of Development Standards....................................................................5-3 5,6 Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing Plan .......................................................5-5 5.7 Maintenance Plan.........................................................................................................5-8 5.8 Amendments................................................................................................................5-9 6 Appendix..................................................................................................................................................... 6-1 5.1 Consistency with City of La Quinta General Plan............................................................6-1 6.2 Reference Table and Exhibit..........................................................................................6-7 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 871 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1.1 — Specific Plan Amendment — Area Comparison......................................................................1-5 Exhibit 1.2 — Regional Location Map..........................................................................................................1-7 Exhibit1.3 —Vicinity Map..........................................................................................................................1-8 Exhibit1.4 —Site Location Map..................................................................................................................1-9 Exhibit 1.5 — Conservation Area...............................................................................................................1-13 Exhibit 1.6.1— Existing General Plan Land Use Map................................................................................1-16 Exhibit 1.6.2 — Proposed Land Use Map..................................................................................................1-17 Exhibit 1.7.1— Existing Zoning.................................................................................................................1-20 Exhibit 1.7.2 — Proposed Zoning Plan.......................................................................................................1-21 Exhibit 2.1—Travertine Land Use Plan.......................................................................................................2-2 Exhibit2.2 — Recreation Plan.....................................................................................................................2-5 Exhibit 2.3 — Lot Configuration Estate and Luxury Single Family Detached..............................................2-7 Exhibit 2.4 — Lot Configuration Large and Mid SFD...................................................................................2-8 Exhibit 2.5 — Lot Configuration Small and Single Family Attached............................................................2-9 Exhibit 2.6 — Lot Configuration Resort Villas............................................................................................2-15 Exhibit3.1 — Estate Homes........................................................................................................................3-4 Exhibit 3.2 — Single Family Luxury Homes..................................................................................................3-5 Exhibit 3.3 — Single Family Mid Homes......................................................................................................3-6 Exhibit 3.4 — Single Family Entry Home.....................................................................................................3-7 Exhibit3.5 — Patio Homes..........................................................................................................................3-8 Exhibit 3.6 — Single Family Attached Units.................................................................................................3-9 Exhibit3.7 —Villas ....................................................................................................................................3-10 Exhibit 3.8 —Typical Materials.................................................................................................................3-11 Exhibit 3.9 — Overall Landscape Illustrative.............................................................................................3-13 Exhibit 3.10 — Landscape Categories Illustrative......................................................................................3-14 Exhibit 3.11— Main Community Entries..................................................................................................3-16 Exhibit 3.12 — Gated Entries.....................................................................................................................3-17 Exhibit 3.13 —Typical Entry Landscape and Monumentation.................................................................3-18 Exhibit 3.14 - Jefferson Street / Avenue 62 Streetscape.........................................................................3-20 Exhibit 3.15 — Loop Collector Streetscape...............................................................................................3-21 Exhibit 3.16 — Residential Streetscape.....................................................................................................3-22 Exhibit 3.17 — Parcel Landscape Open Space...........................................................................................3-24 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 872 Exhibit 3.18 — Community Slope Landscape............................................................................................3-25 Exhibit 3.19 — Open Space and Edge Conditions.....................................................................................3-26 Exhibit 3.20 — On Street Trails..................................................................................................................3-28 Exhibit 3.21— Off Street Trails.................................................................................................................3-29 Exhibit 3.22 — Strolling Trail.....................................................................................................................3-30 Exhibit 3.23 — Community West Park......................................................................................................3-32 Exhibit 3.24 — Community East Park........................................................................................................3-33 Exhibit 3.25 — Resort and Spa Landscape Illustrative..............................................................................3-34 Exhibit 3.26 —Resort and Spa Landscape Concepts.................................................................................3-35 Exhibit 3.27 — Golf Training Facility Landscape Concept.........................................................................3-36 Exhibit 3.28 - Conceptual Wall Type Schedule................................................................................................ 3-37 Exhibit 3.29 - Overall Wall Elevations......................................................................................................3-38 Exhibit 3.30 — Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Interior..................................................................3-41 Exhibit 3.31— Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Exterior..................................................................3-42 Exhibit 3.32 — Landscape Cross -Section 1 and 2......................................................................................3-43 Exhibit 3.33 — Landscape Cross -Sections 3 and 4....................................................................................3-44 Exhibit 3.34 — Landscape Cross -Section 5................................................................................................3-45 Exhibit 3.35 — Landscape Cross -Section 6................................................................................................3-46 Exhibit 3.36 — Landscape Cross -Section 7, 8, and 9.................................................................................3-47 Exhibit 3.37 — Landscape Cross -Sections 10, 11, 12, and 13....................................................................3-48 Exhibit 3.38 - Planting Zones....................................................................................................................3-50 Exhibit 4.1 — Circulation Plan.....................................................................................................................4-3 Exhibit 4.2 — Roadway Sections A, B, & C...................................................................................................4-4 Exhibit 4.3 — Roadway Sections D, E, & F...................................................................................................4-5 Exhibit4.4 — Roundabout...........................................................................................................................4-6 Exhibit 4.5 — Street Gated Entry Section & Details....................................................................................4-7 Exhibit 4.6 —Typical Gated Entries.............................................................................................................4-8 Exhibit 4.7 — Conceptual Water Plan.......................................................................................................4-10 Exhibit 4.8 — Conceptual Sewer Plan........................................................................................................4-12 Exhibit 4.9 — Conceptual Grading Plan.....................................................................................................4-14 Exhibit 4.10 — Slope Ratio Diagram..........................................................................................................4-15 Exhibit 4.11— Conceptual Hydrology Plan...............................................................................................4-17 Exhibit 5.1—Construction Phase 1-A & 1-13 Plan........................................................................................5-7 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 873 Exhibit 6.1—Travertine Specific Plan Land Use Plan (same as Exhibit 2.1)................................................6-2 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Approved 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Specific Plan Amendment.....................................1-3 Table 2 — Land Use Plan Comparison.......................................................................................................1-15 Table 3 - Zoning Plan Comparison...........................................................................................................1-19 Table4: Land Use Summary......................................................................................................................2-1 Table 5: Planning Area Summary..............................................................................................................2-3 Table 6: Development Standards for Single Family Detached Homes in Low Density Planning Areas ..2-12 Table 7: Development Standards for Medium Density Planning Areas..................................................2-13 Table 8: Development Standards for Villas ........ ..................................................................................... 2-14 Table 9: Development Standards for Hotel/Commercial........................................................................2-16 Table10: Landscape Palette...................................................................................................................3-51 Table 11: Prohibited Invasive Ornamental Plants....................................................................................3-54 Table 12: Travertine Specific Plan Statistical Table....................................................................................5-2 Table 13: Development Standards for Low Density Residential...............................................................5-3 Table 14: Development Standards for Medium Density Residential........................................................5-4 Table15: Phasing Plan Summary...............................................................................................................5-6 Table 16: Maintenance Responsibilities...................................................................................................5-8 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 874 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Intent The Travertine Specific Plan Amendment document is prepared to guide development of the site by setting forth a development plan, phasing plan, infrastructure plans, development standards, recreation plan, and design guidelines for architecture, landscaping, and other design elements for the Travertine project. This is an amendment to the original 1995 Specific Plan (SP1994-026) and reduces overall project area from the original plan due to a number of environmental and regulatory constraints identified since the original approval. The grading design of the site is planned to accommodate the proposed development of the site, while still preserving and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. Project design elements are intended to create visual harmony with the surrounding natural environment. This amendment supersedes SP1994-026 and will be the governing document for the project area. 11 Authority and Requirements The Amendment creates a master -planned residential and resort/spa community with a balanced mix of land uses and a quality environment through comprehensive planning regulations, standards, and design guidelines. The purpose of this document is to provide a foundation for a variety of land uses on the Travertine property through the application of regulations, standards, and design guidelines. This Specific Plan Amendment, when adopted by Resolution, serves both planning and regulatory functions, and establishes infrastructure service needs. California Government Code Section 65450 et seq. grants local planning agencies the authority to prepare and adopt specific plans for any area covered by a General Plan for the purpose of establishing systematic methods of implementation of the General Plan. This section of the Government Code mandates what a specific plan shall contain including text and diagrams which specify all the following in detail: • The distribution, location, and text of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. • The proposed distribution, location and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. • Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. • A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, and financing measures necessary to carry out the Travertine project. • A statement of its relationship to and consistency with the General Plan. The local authority and procedures for the review and adoption of the Specific Plan are described in Chapter 9.240 of the Municipal Code. The Specific Plan shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Article 8, Specific Plans, and Section 65450 et seq. of the California Government Code. For those situations and issues not addressed by this Specific Plan's regulations, the City's Zoning Code will serve as the regulatory requirement and as a supplement for administration review procedures, environmental review, and others. The Specific Plan, as amended, and the associated Final EIR shall be used in the review of all project proposals in the Specific Plan area. All mitigation measures shall be referenced in the Conditions of Approval for subsequent entitlements and are included in this Specific Plan as appendices. 1-1 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 875 1.0 INTRODUCTION 13 Specific Plan Amendment Components This Specific Plan is organized into the following sections: Section 1. Introduction: This section summarizes the authority for preparing specific plans and contains the project description and history as well as development objectives. It also provides a comparison of the proposed Specific Pan Amendment to the original 1995 Specific Plan. Section 2. Land Use Plan: The Land Use Plan Section describes residential planning areas, proposed housing types, recreational and natural open space areas, and the community parks and trails planned within the community. Section 3. Design Guidelines: This section is intended to direct the site planning, landscaping, and architectural quality of the development. Streetscapes, entries, edge treatments, walls and fencing, lighting, signage, and architectural design are some of the features addressed in the Design Guidelines Section 4. Infrastructure: This section provides information on circulation improvements, planned backbone water, sewer, and storm drain systems, the grading concept for the development of the project, and public utilities serving Travertine. Section 5. Implementation Measures & Administration: The governing policies and procedures for the review and approval by the City of specific development proposals within the Specific Plan area are described in this section. This section provides the methods and procedures for interpreting and amending the Specific Plan, a summary of project financing, and the planned maintenance responsibilities for new development within the Specific Plan area. Section 6. General Plan Consistency Analysis: This discussion is included within the Appendix to the Specific Plan and provides an analysis of the consistency of the Specific Plan with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan. The Specific Plan Amendment is prepared to serve as an overall framework to guide the development of this project. To ensure the functional integrity, economic viability, environmental sensitivity, and positive aesthetic impact of the project, planning and development goals were established and supported through an extensive analysis. The analysis includes an examination of project environmental constraints, engineering feasibility, market acceptance, economic viability, City General Plan goals, development phasing, and local community goals. As amended, this Specific Plan serves as a regulatory document for development of the 855-acre site into a high -quality, master planned residential community containing a Resort/Spa, varied residential uses, golf and various open space and recreational uses. This document will provide guidance to the City of La Quinta, builders, developers, architects, and designers in implementing the project. 1-2 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 876 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1,4 Project Description The Travertine development is a master planned residential community with a Resort/Spa located in the City of La Quinta on the southern edge of the Coachella Valley at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The project is generally bounded by the extension of Avenue 60 on the north; the extension of Avenue 64 to the south; CVWD Dike No. 4 on the east; and Jefferson Street on the west. The proposed project includes development of a mix of uses including up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types, a resort facility with up to 100 rooms or villas, recreational uses such as a golf training/practice facility featuring a clubhouse and banquet facilities, a number of neighborhood parks, a public trail system and recreational open space, and natural open space for conservation. The Specific Plan Amendment proposes a reduced project from the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan as a result of additional studies and information made available since its approval. These subsequent studies update the environmental analysis and include mitigation measures. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 1995 Travertine Specific Plan analyzed the environmental impacts associated with development of approximately 909 acres of that Plan. However, that 1995 EIR was prepared as a "programmatic" EIR, with a set of Mitigation Measures that also required that additional specific technical studies and environmental analysis be completed prior to project implementation to more specifically identify all on -site environmental sensitivities. These required additional studies have now been completed and have more specifically identified environmental and economic constraints within the project area to such an extent that the implementation of the 1995 Specific Plan, as approved, is now infeasible. This Specific Plan Amendment recognizes those newly identified constraints and incorporates the necessary additional mitigations and modifications in order to comply with Federal, State and local requirements. A detailed discussion of each of these new studies is included in Section 1.7 Project Site History as well as the EIR prepared for this Specific Plan Amendment. However, they can be summarized as resulting in an increase in restricted and natural open space areas and a reduction of developable acreage of the Specific Plan area, due to the mitigation requirements of the 1995 EIR. Table 1 provides a comparison of the 1995 Specific Plan to this Amended Plan. Table 1: Approved 1995 Specific Plan and Proposed Specific Plan Amendment Approved 1995 Specific Plan 909-acres 2,300 Residential Dwelling Units 10-acres of Neighborhood Commercial 500 Room Resort / Hotel 36 — Hole Golf Course Proposed Specific Plan Amendment 855-acres 1,200 Residential Dwelling Units Neighborhood Commercial Removed 100 Room Resort and Wellness Spa Golf Training and Practice Facility with associated Recreational and Commercial Elements and Resort style multi -family homes 1-3 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 877 1.0 INTRODUCTION Tennis Club Private Recreation in Individual Developments 378-acres of Open Space (including golf course) Tennis Club Removed Private Recreation in Individual Developments 358-acres Open Space / Recreational & Restricted (no golf course in Open Space areas) Deletion of noncontiguous acreages including the northernmost Planning Area and miscellaneous acreage not within the City, and adjustments to boundary to accommodate preservation of open space and inclusion of Madison Street right-of-way for EVA purposes 1-4 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 878 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.1— Specific Plan Amendment — Area Comparison Areas removed from Speck Plan 64.8 Acres Areas added to Specific Plan ■ M t r� i ti )p Y �J 7 ■ ■ ■ a a • '■ 1 1 1 � 1-S 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 879 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.4.1 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses The property is located in the City of La Quinta on the southern edge of the Coachella Valley at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The project is generally bounded by the extension of Avenue 60 on the north; the extension of Avenue 64 to the south; CVWD Dike No. 4 on the east; and Jefferson Street on the west. (Exhibit 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4) The project site consists of the following Assessor Parcel Numbers: 766- 110-003, -004, -007, and -009; 766-120-001, -002, -003, -006, -015, -016, -018, -021, and -023 753-040- 014, 016, and -017, 753-050-007, and -029; 753-060-003, 764-280-057 and -059, and 764-028-061. North • Coral Mountain and Coral Mountain Park immediately north of the project site • Lake Cahuilla County Park and Lake Cahuilla approximately 1 mile north • Golf course communities including Andalusia and PGA West approximately 1 mile north of the site South • BLM (Martinez Slide) — Open Space/Wilderness Area and CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area East • Vacant Land owned by: o Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) o Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) o Bureau of Land Management (BLM) o Private vacant lands are directly adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site o The Trilogy Golf Club at La Quinta is approximately 2,500 feet northeast of the intersection of Madison and Avenue 62 West • Vacant, private lands • BLM - Open Space/Wilderness and CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area • BLM and BOR (Guadalupe Channel), managed and maintained by CVWD 1-6 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 880 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.2 — Regional Location Map SLY �114 RAN046ri.. i�r`[• MSAGE . f'Lm V rRi INDIO 3 _ - ° L r ; — - 4 IN❑IAN Vi1E«S COACHELLA �i.,.. LA QVINTA COUNTY OE RIVERS02 y 4rr�� 5�ra•� i1? PROJEC:T$ITE 4 H rr„M �a W rr �nNo• r 1-7 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 881 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.3 — Vicinity Map - _ `: •� IL ash Aff 'fin{ HA I74 vio �i Iwo- 5 ' F anti Roksa y Rook SILdA # .1.11—• . P,17' FROJECT SITE _ X' _- jif lit jrkm ,.��arti=w'���?Mr-aCo�.�Eyt � i��s;n�"�:.a: •rc r_ -—•i�c-, .- 1-8 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 882 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.4 — Site Location Map 28 La QLiinta E 1 11 A r ' jp 32 133 1L�+. County. of k-- ` A k% � iRiverside _1 4 ■ iti = ice# 9q t n L L-rs' 0 SW:. Lra Humburs prglti ABwd Vf �[Arf AN L2 OdhCs E6W4dgry 'n. �tarL��a.�.a s,r..lneza __' N rn w.arq 54�0rW uAm—. �n frtr. :��6�rdF Or—.1-1 Lh. asb.�ar. rs+�-+Mr r •�.F your fay rM rMtnt• I 1-9 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 883 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.5 Project Objectives The physical design for Travertine is based on the fundamental principles of good community form, utilizing the sites' natural form; and the protection or mitigation of environmental constraints now identified as present on the site. To ensure the successful interpretation and implementation of these ideas, the plan's design goals and principles have been distilled down to the following primary principles for this Specific Plan Amendment: 1. To develop a mixed -use master planned community, to include varying housing densities and housing product types, with associated recreational amenities such as, and not limited to, trails and parkland. 2. To facilitate the attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets for new residential construction. 3. To preserve or mitigate impacts to sensitive biological resources in a manner consistent with current Federal, State and local requirements. 4. To develop a project that will generate a sustainable, diversified increase to the City's tax revenue stream, resulting in a project that is economically successful for the City as well as the master developer. 5. Provide for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the community and environs from flooding and hydrological hazards. 1.6 Existing Conditions The site lies on an alluvial fan made up of material deposited by drainages emanating from the Santa Rosa Mountains. The Travertine property is comprised of broad, gently sloping terrain that is typical of the western portions of the Coachella Valley. A cultivated vineyard once occupied most of the northern portion of the project site, but has been abandoned since 2007. The existing infrastructure on the project site is very limited as the site has not been previously developed, and only the former vineyard area was provided with water from three privately owned on -site wells. Section 5 contains detailed descriptions of proposed infrastructure. The Travertine project will be served by Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for domestic water. The site contains three existing privately -owned wells used when the vineyard was active. Additional offsite wells will be developed by the applicant in coordination with CVWD. The nearest Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) sewer connection to the project site currently exists at Monroe Street and Avenue 62. CVWD has completed a preliminary analysis of the Travertine Development that will be used to ensure the size and capacity of the future infrastructure will be adequate to accommodate the estimated project flows. Ultimately flows will discharge into CVWD's Water Reclamation Plant No. 4 in Thermal. The site is currently served with electrical power from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Power from this source was used when the vineyard was last active (2007) to pump irrigation water from three existing privately -owned wells. IID will supply electricity to the development within the Travertine Specific Plan area. Natural gas will be provided to the site by Southern California Gas Company through the extension of natural gas infrastructure via Avenue 62 over Dike #4. Currently there is no natural gas provided on site. 1-10 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 884 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.7 Project Site History The project site is located on an alluvial fan emanating from the Santa Rosa Mountains in the southeast portion of the City of La Quinta. The only known land use of the site can be seen in an area near the center of the site, see Exhibit 1.3; this area was used as a vineyard that included grape vines, irrigation lines, access roads. The vineyard is no longer active and appears to have ceased operation sometime in 2005- 2006. In 1988-1989 the project site was part of a proposed land exchange, the Toro Canyon Land Exchange, between the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Nature Conservancy, to dispose of public lands that would be more suitable for development in exchange for private land further to the south that provides important habitat for Bighorn Sheep. An EA was prepared for the land exchange. The EA concluded that the private land offered in the exchange would now be protected as federal resources in support of Bighorn Sheep and critical habitat. Also, as part of the land exchange, the Travertine project site would be available for development in accordance with the land use planning designations imposed by the City of La Quinta. The exchange consisted of the following: • Five sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains, four sections owned by Travertine property owners and one section owned by the Nature Conservancy; together comprising 3,207 acres within the Santa Rosa Mountain National Scenic Area, offered to the BLM. • One section of land owned by the BLM comprising approximately 639 acres offered to the Travertine property owners. • Upon approval of the Toro Canyon land exchange, the 639 acres were combined with approximately 270 acres of adjacent acres to create the Travertine project site for a total of approximately 909 acres of developable land. The County of Riverside included the Travertine project site within its Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVCP). The ECVCP land use designation for the site's lower elevation - the flatter portions of the site - was "Planned Residential Reserve". This designation was intended to allow for large scale, self- contained Resort/Spa communities. The steeper portions of the site were designated as "Mountainous Areas" in the ECVCP where limited land uses permitted in areas covered by this designation included Open Space, limited recreational uses, limited single family residential, landfills and resource development. Once the Toro Canyon land exchange was approved, the City of La Quinta began annexation proceedings with the county of Riverside for the Travertine project site. The annexation was completed in 1993 with the project site designated as Low Density Residential (LDR, 2 to 4 du/ac) and Open Space (1 du/ac) land uses. In June 1995, the Travertine Specific Plan was approved and an EIR was certified by the La Quinta City Council by adoption of Resolutions 1995-38 and 1995-39, subject to conditions of approval and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Along with the Specific Plan, the corresponding General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone were also approved. The Specific Plan identified a number of land uses including varying densities of residential development, neighborhood commercial, tourist commercial, and golf course open space. In June 1999, the La Quinta Planning Commission re -approved the Specific Plan for the Travertine project site to allow for an indefinite extension of time to develop the site with adoption of Resolution 1999-061. 1.7.1 Required Additional Studies After Specific Plan Approval Following the Plan's extension of time in 1999, the additional environmental studies required by the 1995 EIR began. In June 2004, a request was submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to initiate a Section 7 consultation regarding the impacts to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep and its designated critical habitat. A Biological Opinion (BO) was completed by the USFWS in December 2005 1-11 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 885 1.0 INTRODUCTION that evaluated the biological resources on the project site in a Biological Assessments (BA). The Travertine property owners had acquired several areas off -site to preserve open space habitat for the Bighorn Sheep and had proposed several mitigation measures in the time between the initial Specific Plan approval (1995) and the start of the Section 7 consultations (2005). The BO concluded that the mitigation measures proposed by Travertine, including the setbacks from habitat and the types of vegetation allowed near the southern and western property lines, would be appropriate for the preservation of any critical habitat that existed in the area and that the development of the site as previously approved, would not interfere with the Bighorn Sheep or its critical habitat (Exhibit 1.5) 1-12 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 886 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.5 — Conservation Area YkA - 4+EirJF 6P JET • •� I �.r•. -� + _ � YieRar } 1•• {LI1p F'DAGHELLA VALLEY MULTTLE SPECIES HABITAT CONS ERVAPON A REA n el ` CRiTIGAL HABITAT I ■ BOUNDARY -G.---- kiariiu EN SP.AcE LNEr, C�'Ad'dId }jglyy hLlliGI9 SpaCkd HeGdeU 0 PrOj9Gi Bailiid�}' CrrF4el Iirlel Ganda f115Ghh5'} G•t+i Ire -I cWd Open`4'GSk+1 Gq. q 4b Tb�++a+k Svok ..9 �++ �'—i,•m.oq 1-13 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 887 1.0 INTRODUCTION Implementation of the 1995 Specific Plan required the acquisition of additional right-of-way along the major roadways (Jefferson Street, Madison Street, and Avenue 62) from the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Reclamation. This resulted in the need for another federal Environmental Assessment (EA No. CA-600-06-28) to be prepared and circulated. This EA was adopted in 2006. Archaeological/paleontological surveys and a jurisdictional delineation were both completed as part of this EA process in addition to other special studies to evaluate the impacts of project development. The consultations with the agencies and related documentation resulted in several recommended mitigation measures that the project proponent was required to incorporate into the project. The project proponent also worked closely with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to ensure that the proposed land uses were compatible with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). Development of the project site is considered a "Covered Activity," as long as the following measures are retained in the design of the project (Fish and Wildlife ERIV — 2735.3): • The Specific Plan authorized disturbance must stay outside the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. • The remainder of the property within the Specific Plan area and inside the Conservation Area will be preserved and undisturbed in perpetuity. • The project proponent committed to providing a no interest loan to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission to acquire essential Peninsular Bighorn Sheep habitat in the project area if needed. • The project proponent was to provide additional fees for Bighorn Sheep monitoring and research. In 2007, the project proponent continued to work through the Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures by authorizing the completion of a Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation (2006), including limited subsurface testing on the project site. As part of this effort, four local Native -American tribes were contacted for comment regarding their knowledge of cultural resources in the area. The Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians indicated awareness of several cultural resources in close proximity to the project site and requested a Native -American monitor be present during any ground disturbing activities. Also, during 2007, a Supplemental Cultural Resources Survey Report was prepared to evaluate the access road from the extension of Madison Street and access road from the extension of Jefferson Street. Results for both areas were negative for prehistoric and historic -era resources. As a result of all three surveys, the Specific Plan Land Use Plan and other plans (circulation, infrastructure) were designed to avoid areas that were found to have cultural and paleontological sensitivity. See Exhibit 1.5 Conservation Areas (Restricted Open Space designation). In summary, as a result of the additional studies conducted as required by the original EIR, sensitive habitat and cultural resource areas have been identified and other areas identified as necessary to accommodate and manage storm waters across the site have been proposed in this Amended Specific Plan as open space areas. 1-14 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 888 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.8 Relationship to the City General Plan As a part of the project, the City will consider the approval of a General Plan Amendment changing certain provisions of the City's General Plan to provide for the development of Specific Plan. The concurrent approval of this General Plan Amendment will ensure the project's consistency with the City's General Plan. The General Plan Amendment is discussed below. 1.8.1 Land Use Element The General Plan Amendment will change the land use configurations of General Plan Land Use Map for the project area for the following designations: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Tourist Commercial (including Resort/Spa Mixed Use), and Open Space. Table 2 — Land Use Plan Comparison Existing General Plan Proposed General Plan General Plan Designation Acres Units Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 318.0 758 Medium / High Residential 84.4 774 60.8 442 Tourist Commercial 30.9 84.5 Open Space - Recreation 365.3 55.9 Open Space -Natural 12.2 301.2 Major Community Facilities 4.1 General Commercial 10.0 Master Planned Roadways 20.1 35.0 Total 909.2 2,300 855.4 1,200 1-15 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 889 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.6.1 — Existing General Plan Land Use Map Exisbwig General Nan G,enerali Plan DEsIgnetian 'rt � Lnw Derlsity ReSidlerltia I Acres Units 3$2_2 Y525 - Medilrr I High Residential ` TouristCumrrlerciai S4.4 30_9 774 J Open Space - Recreation 365.3 k 1 � xMSstrrfUnnttl I Open Space -Natural hlaJor CQnYmnity Favlfts G�r►eraN Cwrurlersial Ruadways ilF: Igul 12.2 4.1 1" 20.1 949_2 #Olj MLkrl inrr l � R+x•kSiGdc y � - - 1 LE•.EhU lcw denal� Reeidedial Tcundl CQraaoal _ klaior fnnnrr-ly Ferlem Spanfic Rlen 9wn�r7 _ WrarinMgnaenwl Reolddeuol ')ORA 4mL-- • RWaallCn Exnunn Speak. Plon 9oul-derr Sener3lCommerclel �:)Pen Sparc how -al 1-16 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 890 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1.6.2 — Proposed General Plan Land Use Map k' Proposed General Plan General Plan Designation Acres units tm Density Residerrkial 31810 758 PROPOSED JEPPER94ON Medlurn � High Resildenti al 60.8 447 .STREET Tourist Cbmmercla I 84,5 10peri'Spike • Retreadixi 55.9 Open Space-Nabxal 301Z Major Cumuniq Faulites -- Genefal Commerclal — - Master Planned Roadways I 89,0 NAP Total 855_4 1200 LOOP STREET YI� EAS T II pI {.4 . 1 I Fyn STREET + r L &DP .] TREC T AVENUE 62 L � - _ * ram- . r I Mari i ner ' Rnek SIWe LEGEND 0 Low Oensly Re9denhd OFen 9Po• Pr_ ez-',x M9tl�� +I-rpll Pan�lY Rer10QM�al � OWn BR�� FLral �4uu�r�8rufi6ie�91 1-17 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 891 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.8.2 Circulation Element The General Plan Amendment will also change the General Plan Roadway Classification Map of the General Plan as follows: • The removal of Madison Street as a General Plan Roadway from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62. Instead, this road alignment will be utilized as an emergency vehicle access (EVA) for the project. • The adopted alignment of Jefferson Street within the project boundaries. Exhibit 1.6.3 - Existing and Proposed General Plan Roadway Classification Existing y �11+ ►tiF ���i�a�i� SpJ�triaa'JriO�errce # W 49 • PrimaryArflriut 0 W M s $rtlrndaryArtCrrat ���]11111 MadlftEid Se d dnry f.i ...•� CalkclW Ar[eYiGf -Cr-._Mr.° UnlimArfffmf J�W0• 1 yLTsy�s. _ F ti j f Gf SGY4! fx y�L /I4 N f Proposed 1-18 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 892 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.9 Zoning Map Amendment The City of La Quinta's Official Zoning Map is proposed to be modified to correspond with the land use areas and designations reflected in this Amendment. Table 3 - Zoning Plan Comparison Existing Zoning Plan Proposed Zoning Plan Zoning Acres Units Acres Units Low Density Residential 382.2 1526 318.0 758 Medium Density Residential 60.8 442 Medium / High Residential 84.4 774 Neighborhood Commercial 10.0 Tourist Commercial 30.9 84.5 Golf Course 377.5 Open Space 4.1 357.1 Master Planned Roadways 20.1 35.0 Total 909.2 2,300 855.4 1,200 1-19 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 893 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1. Z I — Existing Zoning Plan IVAP Exis.fing Z=n rg 131 an ?nning AcFps Ll-iiti I q- l5en&fty FbRsjd"Hal 3921 15N KlmdiLm [)Rnsity RRsidpraid MedfteA I H;gh Rmidi-mMal :04.4 7 7i'. 'AedmhbAwd CGmrnerclal 100 7ok.rj5Lt Cormewl-ill 90-9 Guff CvLjrzre 377.5 oot�n sodu 4.1 Wa,,cu armed Ways I U.1 M.2 290c A LeFtajF .62 L -T! Aminu Rocl S I i& F F& I LON 13091.7 PKIdDle.-Al Tormi coppmewi prm(Aaj sDeak plan Boundarp WWU- High Pw:Ap FlowlanILA 50" ra... ExrmiAg 5p-?uk Pim ilmnwN NqqhGo,hM CX.Woul UPOII9PQCk- 1-20 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 894 1.0 INTRODUCTION Exhibit 1. Z2 — Proposed Zoning Plan Zur-3ing Low Demsity R-E9identiao PROPOSED JEFFERSON STREET Medi urn 62rksitW R2sidenLia I Medi urn i H Igh Res Ide nfia I LEGEND 1. 13-I Low Dumee Ro -i-al wiedivrn bendr FitaKkniml Nuw) C@r1fw:W lrcipcEed Zoning Plan Acrus Units 318.0 758 G10.-B 44? 84.5 3S �j .955.4 1-211 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 895 2.0 LAND USE 2- LAND USE This section identifies the development standards applicable to each planning area with the Travertine development; this includes the project description, land use descriptions, permitted uses and requirements. The design and land use plan address City of La Quinta community planning goals and concepts as well as aligning with community wide conservation and design. 2.1 Project Description and Summary As illustrated in Exhibit 2.1, the Travertine development will be comprised of a variety of land uses that are broken down into planning areas. Residential land uses will range from low density to medium density. A resort/spa facility will serve tourists and recreational visitors. A golf training/practice facility and banquet facility will provide recreational opportunities. Some related commercial uses will be combined with the resort/spa and golf facility to serve the daily needs of the community and its visitors. Table 4 identifies the overall land use summary planned for the property. Table 5 provides a summary of the land uses by planning area. Table 4: Land Use Summary Land Use Acres Percent Residential 378.8 ac 44.3% Resort/Golf and Banquet 84.5 ac 9.9% Facilities Master Planned Roadways 35.0 ac 4.1% Open Space Uses 357.1 ac 41.7% Total 855.4 ac 100% 2.1.1 Land Use Plan Description The Conceptual Land Use Plan is illustrated in Exhibit 2.1. The Travertine Land Use Plan incorporates a broad range of uses consistent with a master planned community by providing: • A mix of public and private uses, • A pattern of residential neighborhoods defined by interconnected loop streets linked by an extensive trail system, • Access to open space via pedestrian walkways and bike paths, • A moderately curvilinear primary street pattern connecting to local streets as the street system connects the Medium and Low -Density Residential neighborhoods within the Travertine community, • Sidewalks and bike lanes throughout the Travertine community with a Class II bike lane located along both sides of Jefferson Street, • A central walking path system to connect the community from north to south, • A trail system that circumnavigates the project and connects with the interior strolling trails, • Two recreational community parks for both passive and active uses, as well as local pocket parks within neighborhoods • A golf training facility that provides a Golf Academy and a 4-hole training course. 2-1 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 896 2.0 LAND USE Exhibit 2.1 —Travertine Specific Plan Land Use Plan •L� I I I A4rh4P .f { -cum I Mourn a t L ram byre. 3iiiFls'.i io ,uu IT ... apt r m. -CQ STriEET MST r.a. ��aoq GGfi11h:4WTV T ,roe 4 g 1 , au_• .r .. I r ALCM.1E 4 LEGEOD 0 Low Oen" Reodmd of . 318 Ar Open Spam f RermeYenei - M.9 ale 0 KWIurs CimmLr Readonhol - B0.6 Ac � Opon Spm2f Noluml • W1.2 Pc TrAal ArrRQp &% 4 AG Resort . GdF Cluh . U.&Ac (= Muster Plerrrled Roedr+ep . 95 QAm 2-2 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 897 2.0 LAND USE Table 5: Planning Area Summary Planning Area Summary PA Land Use Acres I Resort / Spa 38.3 2 Medium Density Residential 25.9 3 Low Density Residential 29.4 4 Low Density Residential 9.6 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 6 Medium Density Residential 20.1 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 11 Resort / Golf 46.2 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 14 Low Density Residential 39.0 15 Low Density Residential 33.3 16 Low Density Residential 50.4 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 21 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 TOTALS 855.4 Master Planned Roadways Acres Jefferson 17.1 N.A.P Access 0.2 Loop West 9.7 Loop East 5.5 Section 5 Access 0.2 Madison EX. A. 1.5 PA Access 0.8 TOTAL 35.0 2-3 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 898 2.0 LAND USE 2.1.2 Open Space Approximately 357.1-acres or 41.7% of the Amended Travertine Specific Plan area are designated as open space, including both natural open space and recreational open space uses (Planning Areas 17-20). Approximately 55.9-acres of the site are planned for Open Space — Recreation uses. Designed to offer both passive and active oriented recreational opportunities, areas planned for Open Space — Recreation include picnic tables, barbeques, golf facilities, a tot lot playground, and staging facilities for the regional interpretive trail. Natural Open Space accounts for approximately 301.2-acres predominately along the southern boundary of the property. 2.1.3 Recreational Trails The Specific Plan proposes two types of recreational trails — one system within the community and one encircling the perimeter of the community. The core inter -community network is a spine trail, which provides a direct link to community open spaces and gathering areas, as well as passive and active spaces. This 5.3-mile system also provides connectivity from the individual residential homes along internal local streets and bikeways along Jefferson Street. The Community Grand Loop Trail will include a staging area, located to the south of the extension of Avenue 62 that will provide parking and public access to 5-mile loop of an interpretive stations, rest stops and scenic vistas that will circumnavigate the project boundary, as seen in Exhibit 2.2. Natural open space areas will largely be protected areas, however the community perimeter trail will provide view opportunities and potentially interpretive kiosks, for the public to experience these areas. 2-4 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 899 2.0 LAND USE Exhibit 2.2 — Recreation Plan AJ i I i �rinunp�ila f rf+Fr �f F fff ��r �I Rods 4hde I �==!ij -Ao HA Trol F-q InlonxinemrTmil 9p9n SCOW O MehirqJ 03mounup OrondLoop Troll 0 CML 11 Me Try C4Anunllp Wrwi 5tral.4 Trrl Qpm SpK.? Trdlmad 2-5 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 900 2.0 LAND USE 2.1.4 Roadways The development of Travertine provides for substantial improvements to several public roadways, including the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a Modified Secondary Arterial south of the proposed Coral Canyon property and the westerly extension of Avenue 62, also as a Modified Secondary Arterial. The right-of-way corridor for Madison Street will be improved as an emergency vehicle access (EVA) connecting the Travertine development area Avenue 60. Loop roads emanating east and west from the Jefferson Road spine via two roundabout intersections will be privately maintained. The loop road entries into residential areas will be gated and will serve as collector roads to access the individual residential neighborhoods. Collectively, the roadway system has been designated as Planning Area 21 for the purposes of tracking overall acreage of the Specific Plan area. 2.1.5 Residential Residential areas (Planning Areas 2 through 10 and 12 through 16) account for approximately 44.3% of the amended project's total land area. Low Density Residential Planning Areas will vary in density from 1.5 du/ac to 4.5 du/ac. Medium Density Residential will vary in density from 4.5 du/ac to 8.5 du/ac. The overall project proposes a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units based on range of lot sizes, with an overall average density for the project of 1.4 du/ac. In conformance with project goals, several housing styles are proposed to appeal to a range of future Travertine residents. The residential lot layouts are designed to reflect the project site's natural character by minimizing areas proposed for grading and softening the slopes between the residential pads. The Travertine residential products will provide a variety of options. Six residential types are proposed: • Estate Homes • Single Family Luxury Homes • Single Family Large Homes • Single Family Mid Homes • Patio Homes Small Lot • Single Family Attached Units For lot configuration see Exhibit 2.3 for estate and luxury single family detached (SFD) lot configurations; Exhibit 2.4 for large and mid SFD lot configurations and Exhibit 2.5 for small SFD and single family attached unit lot configurations. 2-6 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 901 2.0 LAND USE Exhibit 2.3 — Lot Configuration Estate and Luxury Single Family Detached LU w Q3 w W LU co I I AA AA TYP_ REWDE-AF MIL ROAD I8' �wiln sie. ESTATE LOTS MfN LOT.- 9r000 sa FT. MIN- WIDTH: 70' MII+I_ DEPTH: 100' es.s�x�.w. sa��irr 1� 4 I fb' 7. r7. 9j ? Ol7 TYP. RE$fUENTIAL ROAD fly Load Garage jLuxuRr SF0 WtS MfN LOP 7,0X SQ. FT MIN. MOTH: 60' MIN DEPTH T ' 2-7 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 902 2.0 LAND USE Exhibit 2.4 — Lot Configuration Large and Mid SFD W LU w 49L-- — BOih4. 55'ry I AA AA iS'hY f8'mi 75'A1�A'f PC 4 G&mye LARGE SFD LOTS MIN - LOT OF, 6,000 SQ- FT MIN- WIDTH- 55, MIN. DEPTH_ 100' WIJF 92�410 ESNA AA �p5'hdfPl. TYR. RESVENTIAL ROAD ra MAD SPO LOTS A41N. LOT. 5,500 SO. VT. MiN. WIDTH. 50' MIN. DEPTH: 90' 2-8 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 903 2.0 LAND USE Exhibit 2.5 - Lot Configuration Small and Single Family Attached 50, WN. 45, WN. W r� 9 51 � WN. AA AA AA -F71 I$; 7t, LU W H 4 6' �TYR RE-SOENTFAL ROAD WALL LOT SFD MIN. WIDTH_ 45' IN- DEPTH-- 80' q75 XAUW 31.1JhNM1' � � a _ I 1wJN. 5 Of TYP - - -ROAD-- SIN LF FA MIL Y ATTACHED UNITS MN. LOT- 4,000 Q. FT. h iN. WIDTH: 35' M. DEPTH: 70' i 2-9 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 904 2.0 LAND USE 2.1.6 Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities Planning Areas 1 and 11 will provide for Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities. Planning Area 1 is planned for a luxury resort and wellness spa, with 100 guest villas, on the approximately 38.3-acre site located at the northwest entrance to the project from Jefferson Street. This area will consist of resort related amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities; tennis, yoga, walking and hiking trails. The proposed amendment would allow fractional ownership/time-share development in the tourist commercial zones (PA 1 & 11) with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The hotel/resort wellness center proposes 100 guest villas or rooms within the planning area. Within PA 11, a golf academy with related 4-hole practice course is located near the southeastern entry to the project on approximately 46.2 acres. This will provide a high -end practice facility, entertainment/ banquet facilities and wedding gardens for both the residents and guests. 2-10 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 905 2.0 LAND USE 2,2. Development Regulations & Standards The following section describes the development regulations and standards for Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Resort/Spa Mixed Use, and Open Space land use categories. The land use character within the Planning Areas is intended to facilitate estate living, medium density villa -style life, and a Resort/Spa and tourist orientation. All three categories are anticipated to be implemented via a range of lot sizes. The regulations and standards contained within this Plan shall apply to all development proposals with the Specific Plan area. Whenever the Specific Plan is silent on any development regulations or standards, the City's Municipal Code will apply. 2.2.1 Low Density Residential- Planning Areas 3-5, 7, 8, 10, & 12-16 The Low Density Residential (1.5-4.5 du/ac) category will be characterized by larger single-family detached residential lots (from 5,500 to 9,000 square feet or greater) with the opportunity for custom homes. These homes will have the largest setbacks in the development, as well as the smallest maximum lot coverage. A community park with recreational facilities is located in Planning Area S and is linked by pedestrian trail to the community center facilities located in Planning Area 13. 2.2.1.L Permitted Uses Permitted uses in the Low Density Residential areas of the Specific Plan will conform to those listed in Municipal Code Chapter 9.40 Residential Permitted Uses. The following uses require a conditional use permit: • Mobile home subdivisions and manufactured homes on individual lots, subject to Section 9.60.180 2-11 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 906 2.0 LAND USE 2.2.1.2 Development Standards Any of the products listed in Table 6 can be built in any of the Low -Density Residential planning areas. The development standards applicable to any individual residential lot will be a function of the lot's area, subject to limited exceptions permitted and described in Section 5 Implementation Measures and Administration. Table 6: Development Standards for in Low Density Planning Areas Product Estate Luxury SFD Large SFD Mid SFD Minimum Lot Size 9,000 sq. ft. 7,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 5,500 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width, Detached' 70 feet 60 feet 55 feet 50 feet Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet 90 feet Minimum Cul-de-Sac 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet Lot Width Maximum Structure Height 2 22 feet 22 feet 28 feet 28 feet Maximum Number of 2 2 2 2 Stories Minimum Front Yard 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Setback Minimum Garage 18 feet 18 feet 18 feet 18 feet Setback' Minimum Interior Side Yard Setbacks' 7.5 feet 7.5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setbacks' 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard 25 feet 20 feet 15 feet 5 feet Setback Maximum Lot Coverage 35% 35% 40% 45% 'The Design and Development Director can administratively approve modifications of the standards up to 15% to account for irregular lotting situations. Please refer to the City of La Quinto Municipal Code Section 9.50.0701rregular lots, for irregular lot specifications. 2Building height will be measured from finished building pad elevation. 'A11 setbacks are measured from the property line. Side -loaded garages may encroach up to 5 feet into the front yard setback. °Mechanical equipment shall be allowed within side yard setback area with a minimum three-foot clearance to the side property line. 'Exterior (Perimeter) Streets for the Travertine Specific Plan area are Loop Street East and West, Jefferson Street, Avenue 62 and the Madison EVA. 2-12 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 907 2.0 LAND USE 2.3.2 Medium Density Residential — Planning Areas 2, 6, and 9 Planning Area 2, 6 and 9 are located to the north of Jefferson Street. These are designated Medium Density Residential reflecting the transition between the lower density golf, residential housing and open space development and the resort/spa development. The Medium Density Residential Planning Areas are intended to provide medium density (4.5-8.5 du/ac) single-family residential products to accommodate residents seeking lots ranging from 4,000 to 5,775 square feet in size. The development standards in Table 5 provide for a characteristic medium -density residential neighborhood. 2.3.2.1 Permitted Uses Permitted and prohibited use shall conform to Municipal Code Chapter 9.40 Residential Permitted Uses, for Planning Areas 2, 6 and 9. 2.3.2.2 Development Standards Either of the two products listed in Table 7 can be built in any of the Medium -Density Residential planning areas, as determined by the individual lot size. Limited exceptions may be approved as described in Section 5, Density Transfer Provisions. Table 7., Development Standards for Medium Density Planning Areas Product Small Lot SFD Single Family Attached Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. 4,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width, Detached 1 45 feet 35 feet Minimum Lot Depth 1 80 feet 70 feet Minimum Cul-de-Sac Lot Width 35 feet 35 feet Maximum Structure Height 2 28 feet 28 feet Maximum Number of Stories 2 2 Minimum Front Yard Setback 10 feet 15 feet Minimum Garage Setback 18 feet 5 feet Rear Yard Setbacks 15 feet 10 feet Minimum Interior Side Yard Setbacks' 5 feet 7.5 feet Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setbacks5 10 feet 10 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 55% 55% 'The Design and Development Director can administratively approve modifications of the standards up to 15% to account for irregular lotting situations. Please refer to the City of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.50.070 Irregular lots, for irregular lot specifications. 'Building height will be measured from finished building pad elevation. 'All setbacks are measured from the property line 'Mechanical equipment shall be allowed within side yard setback area with a minimum three-foot clearance to the side property line. 5 Exterior (Perimeter) Streets for the Travertine Specific Plan area are Loop Street East and West, Jefferson Street and Avenue 62. 2-13 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 908 2.0 LAND USE 2.3.3 Resort (Tourist Commercial) — Planning Areas 1 and 11 Planning Area 1 is located in the northern portion of the site and anticipated to provide 100-villas and wellness spa. Planning Area 11 is located in the southern portion of the site and anticipated to provide a golf training/practice facility with a golf academy, banquet facilities and a four -hole training golf course. Both are planned to be a part of a resort and/or golf related use. Site Development Permits will be submitted as needed by the future developers of the Hotel/Resort and Golf Facilities including any fractional ownership options. Any of the products listed in Table 6 and 7 can be built in any of the Tourist Commercial planning areas. For lot configurations of the resort villas, see Exhibit 2.6. The Travertine Specific Plan permits a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units to be constructed. If Planning Areas 1 and/or 11 develop(s) with residential housing, these dwelling units will be counted toward the maximum of 1,200 units. Transfer of Dwelling Units may occur according to the provisions provided in Section 5. This area will be subject to review through the Tentative Tract Map process or a Site Development Permit process. The maximum number of units allowed in the Travertine Specific Plan may not be exceeded without a formal amendment to the Specific Plan. 2.3.3.1 Permitted Uses Permitted uses in Planning Area 1 and 11 will conform with those listed in Municipal Code Chapter 9.80 Nonresidential Permitted Uses (Tourist Commercial), except as modified herein. Resort Residential uses shall be permitted for Planning Areas 1 and 11, in addition Resort Villas shall be permitted without a conditional use permit. Short-term Vacation Rentals shall be permitted with appropriate permits and licenses per Section 3.25 of the Municipal Code. The following uses shall require a conditional use permit in Planning Areas 1 and 11: • Printing, blueprinting and copy services. • Medical offices —physicians, dentists, optometrists, chiropractors and similar practitioners, 3 or fewer offices in one building • Restaurants, drive -through • Townhome and multifamily dwelling as a primary use (any approved units to be included in the 1,200 maximum) The development standards for Planning Areas 1 and 11 shall be those as defined in Municipal Code Section 9.90.040 (Tourist Commercial), except as follows: Table 8: Development Standards for Villas Product Villas Minimum lot frontage 30 feet 28 feet Maximum building height' 22 feet adjacent to an image corridor Maximum number of stories 2 Minimum livable reserved floor area excluding 420 sq. ft. garage 2-14 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 909 2.0 LAND USE Minimum front yard setback from: Street or parking stall curb 8 feet Pedestrian circulation walks 5 feet Garage/carport setback -from street curb 5 feet Minimum building to building setback: Without partial attachmentz 6 feet With partial attachmentz 4 feet Minimum interior/exterior side yard setbacks s 3 feet Minimum rear yard setback 15 feet Maximum allowable wall height 8 feet Minimum parking required 1 space per bedroom 1 space per 300 sq. ft. GFA 'Chimneys, roof vents, finials, spires, and similar architectural features not containing usable space are permitted to extend up to three feet above the maximum structure height. 'Partial attachment of two buildings is made when an enclosed area having a typical interior function such as a hot water heater closet furnace closet, or other essential use, is attached to two otherwise separate buildings. Construction standards and fire ratings shall meet U.B.C. requirements. 3 Mechanical equipment shall be allowed within side yard setback areas with a minimum three-foot clearance to the side property line Exhibit 2.6 — Lot Configuration Resort Villas PRIVATE RGAD 1' Q LQ CL 5' MIN_ ` PAD SETBACK RESORT VILLAS. 2-15 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 910 2.0 LAND USE Table 9: Development Standards for Hotel/Commercial Product Hotel/Commercial Maximum Building Height' 40 feet Maximum Number of Stories 3 stories Maximum Number of Keys 100 Hotel keys Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) 0.5 Minimum perimeter building/landscape setbacks 40/20 feet 'Building height will be measured from finished building pad elevation. 'Building height does not include architectural projections. Architectural projections shall be regulated by Section 9.90.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. A line -of --sight study will be conducted and submitted when the final designs are submitted to the City for design review. 2.3.4 Open Space/Recreation Uses — Planning Areas 17, 18, 19 A conceptual plan for multi -use trail purposes is included in Chapter 4 and shown on Exhibit 2.2. Trails have been provided throughout the community to allow homeowners to access the various neighborhood parks and open space features of the community. 2.3.4.1 Permitted Uses Permitted uses shall conform to those included in Municipal Code Section 9.120.020 Table of Permitted Uses for Parks and Recreation (PR), Golf Course (GC) and Open Space (OS). 2.3.4.2 Development Standards —Open Space/Recreation The Open Space/Recreation area (Exhibit 2.1) will be subject to Section 9.130.010 of the Municipal Code. 2.3.5 Natural Open Space/Restricted Open Space — Planning Area 20 Along the southern, western, and eastern boundaries of the site, there is an area of land that is restricted from development due to the various environmental constraints including biological, geological, and cultural resources (Exhibit 2.2). This area will remain undisturbed to preserve these resources, however the community perimeter trail will provide view opportunities and potentially interpretive kiosks. As part of the recreational plan and trail system, there will be an interpretive trail that will provide signage and educational information along the trail to highlight the site's cultural elements. A cultural resource study has been conducted for the area near the Martinez Rock Slide, and local tribes have been contacted as part of the procedure. This area is designated as a natural open space buffer between the residential development and the open space of the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Portions of the open space/natural area were determined to be of biological importance by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) through the Biological Opinion completed in 2005 and the subsequent federal Environmental Assessment completed in 2006. If new information is obtained regarding these biological resources, it may result in a change in the acreage restricted from disturbance by the USFWS. In this event, any area removed from restricted open space will fall under the open space/recreation category and will be subject to the development standards detailed in Section 2.2.4.1. The developer will be required to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). A portion of this area is also in a conservation area of the CVMSHCP. Coordination with 2-16 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 911 2.0 LAND USE CVAG will be necessary to site the water tanks in this area. In addition, an all-weather access road will be installed along the western edge of the development for access to Section 5. This is shown in the Circulation plan in Section 4.1. 2.3.5.1 Permitted Uses • Trails, interpretative signs/kiosks along the perimeter of the area only • Permanent structures, with the exception of two water reservoirs, service roadway, underground pipelines and ancillary facilities as allowed through consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, will be prohibited in the Open Space/Natural area. • There will be an access road provided to connect off -site properties in Section 5, to the loop road of the Travertine project. This will be defined by an easement and entitled by the Applicant to allow access to and from the project to Section 5. • All other uses will be prohibited in this area. 2.3.5.2 Development Standards —Open Space/Natural The water reservoir structures, in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District guidelines and direction, will not exceed 50 feet in height, unless a height in excess of 50 feet is specifically required by CVWD. 2.3.5.3 Additional Requirements Development within the Specific Plan will be subject to the CVMSHCP Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation Measures and any applicable Land Use Adjacency Guidelines (Sections 4.4 and 4.5 respectively of the Final Major Amendment to the CVMSHCP — August 2016). Exterior lighting shall also comply with Section 9.100.150, Outdoor Lighting contained in the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. Lighting and Photometric Plans shall be approved with a Site Development Permit. 2-17 1 Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 912 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3 DESIGN GUIDELINES The guidelines contained in this section identify unifying elements for design of buildings and landscaping within the Travertine development in order to complement its surrounding community. The exhibits provided are intended as conceptual illustrations and do not depict final designs, or plans. 11 Purpose and Intent The Design Guidelines have been developed to achieve a high quality, cohesive design concept for the community that will develop within the Travertine Specific Plan. These design guidelines provide the foundation for the design and construction of an aesthetically unified residential and tourist commercial development incorporating the natural environment and the local history of the surrounding area. The design guidelines are intended to: • Ensure the extensive open space elements of the plan are visible and available to all residents. • Assist in implementing the design intent of the Specific Plan by establishing project compatibility among different residential densities and land uses. • Provide a consistent approach to site planning and the design of buildings, streets, signage, walls and fences, lighting, landscaping and other design elements that will endure the life of the community. • Ensure the placement of structures consider the environmental conditions including sun orientation, prevailing winds and on and off -site views. • Ensure the residential development edges are softened by landscape whenever possible. • Promote the orientation of residential products to maximize vistas and access to open space uses. • Offer a variety of residential products, styles and lot configurations that will ease monotony and help to create a pleasing distinction of home types. • Ensure manufactured slopes have varied gradients and where appropriate are shaped to mimic natural landforms. • Provide for a varied street scene by staggering front setbacks and garage orientations. • Ensure all land uses are cohesively situated within the project's natural setting. 32 Introduction The Travertine land use plan has been designed to make the most of the benefits of the distinguishing qualities of its location and topography. The land use plan is influenced by and is sensitive to the environment in which the community is located. The Design Guidelines adopted as part of the Travertine Specific Plan consist of two principal components: Landscape Design Elements and Architectural Design Elements. These components define the design concept, physical character and overall design vision of Travertine. The Design Guidelines establish the framework to achieve a harmonious compatibility between the residential neighborhoods and project design features. 3,3 Theme Travertine draws its inspiration from the desert environment in which it is situated. The project's unique setting finds itself at the base of the Santa Rosa mountains and upon completion will be surrounded by permanent open space as a backdrop for this one -of -a -kind community. The large landforms, including the historic Martinez Rock Slide and Coral Mountain, act as an inspiration for theming the project in terms of form, color, and scale. The goal of this project is to provide the highest quality residential and tourist commercial master planned community. 3-11Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 913 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES The Resort/Spa portion of the project will provide a unique setting for wellness. The Resort/Spa will cater to a clientele interested in state-of-the-art holistic healing methods as well as a relaxation therapy that will define this exclusive Resort/Spa. The massing and scale of the Resort/Spa architecture is intended to blend with and mimic the Coral Mountain topography that is the natural backdrop. Architectural designs for the Travertine community may be contemporary or traditional interpretations of the common contemporary desert themed architecture; as long as they are comprised of a consistent and appropriate design vocabulary that is true to the principles of the style and stay within the constraints of location, program, and budget. It is the intention of these guidelines to foster a community of unique environmental design solutions that are appropriate for the project. 3.4 Architectural Design Elements The integrity of the architectural character of the project will be maintained through the application of guidelines stipulated within the plan and throughout the site. When used together the styles should be designed to create a neighborhood character that will be sustainable over time. Each home should contribute to the architectural character of the neighborhood. Design elements such as porches, recessed windows, architectural details and accents, garage configurations and orientations, and articulated elevations are encouraged to enhance individual homes and to promote the overall neighborhood character. The Architectural Guidelines suggest themes compatible with the Coachella Valley character but are not intended to limit expressions of varying architectural styles. The Architectural Guidelines section outlines selected architectural styles and massing by the proposed home types and densities for the project. Examples of six typical home sizes are listed below and styles can be found in Exhibits 3.1-3.7. Low Density Residential • Estate Homes, Exhibit 3.1 • Single Family Luxury, Exhibit 3.2 • Single Family Mid, Exhibit 3.3 • Single Family Entry, Exhibit 3.4 Medium Density Residential • Patio Homes, Exhibit 3.5 • Single Family Attached Units, Exhibit 3.6 Resort Residential and Spa • Villas, Exhibit 3.7 Every development proposal within the Travertine Specific Plan shall be reviewed bythe City of La Quinta to assure its conformance with the intent of the architectural guidelines stated and illustrated within the document. However, other suitable designs proposed that may not be specifically mentioned in this document, may be considered and approved upon a finding by the approving authority that the proposed design is consistent with the initial theme as contained within the Specific Plan. The guidelines below describe general attributes that are common to the architectural examples discussed. These are not intended as regulatory requirements and may be adapted and modified to suit a particular style that creates a richness of diversity in the Specific Plan area. Accordingly, these Design Guidelines are provided as a resource to those involved in the design and implementation of this Specific Plan and illustrative in nature and meant to be flexible and respond to the changes in taste over time. 3-2 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 914 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Massing and Scale: • The size and scale of the building should be proportionate to the size of the lot and building's setting in compliance with setbacks. • Provide variable setback to different parts of the dwelling unit to encourage vertical and horizontal massing breaks. • Varied garage layouts and floor plan configurations that create more desirable proportions and neighborhood curb appeal. • Projections and recesses that provide shadow and depth. • The addition of balconies or porches is highly encouraged to improve the scale and massing of two-story homes. • The solar orientation of the buildings will be a key consideration in the design in order to reduce the impact of the development on the local utilities. Building Articulation: • The roof ridgelines, heights and slopes of the homes should be appropriate to the intended architectural style. • Design elements such as fireplaces and chimneys add interest with added articulation to home designs. Porches, Balconies, Stoops, and Decks: • Front porches, balconies, covered terraces, courtyards are key elements used to provide outdoor living spaces. • Porches, balconies and covered terraces should be authentic to the architectural style of the home. • Porches, balconies and covered terraces should be in proportion to the scale of the building. • Decks and balconies should be of adequate size to serve as outdoor spaces. • Decks and balconies of adjacent homes should be staggered to protect privacy of neighbors and • Decks and balcony posts, trims and balustrade railings shall be consistent with the architectural style of the home 3.4.1 Color The proposed architectural color motif will be desert compatible, using a palette of earth tones. This harmonious and pleasing palette will be completed with a variety of accents, roof tones and textures, with complementary window moldings and architectural detailing. The predominantly earth tone structure colors will range from beiges, gray -green tones, mauves, whites, creams, tan, sand, light browns, and similar earth tones. 3.4.2 Materials Roofing material shall be compatible with architectural features and resistant to the harsh desert climate. In addition, stucco, rock fagade, tile, and materials resistant to the desert environment will be utilized in the construction of the buildings onsite. Energy efficiency will be a major consideration when designing the homes and buildings in the development. Unsuitable materials, such as unprotected exposed metal, equipment and venting, unprotected wood, and vinyl, will be prohibited. Examples of materials that may be used are found in Exhibit 3.8. 3-31Panc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 915 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.1 — Estate Homes 3-41Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 916 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.2 — Single Family Luxury Homes 3-51Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 917 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.3 — Single Family Mid Homes WIJ 3-61Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 918 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.4 — Single Family Entry Home 3-71Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 919 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.5 — Patio Homes 3-81Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 920 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.6 — Single Family Attached Units 3-91Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 921 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.7 — Villas 3-101Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 922 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.8 — Typical Materials Materials will r flect and respond to the Desert envlroments; stone veneers, stucco tlle, and other decorative materials wiII be common. 3-111Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 923 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3,5 Landscape Design Elements The primary purpose of the design guidelines for landscape architecture is to ensure that landscape treatments and materials utilized in Travertine will enhance the high -quality aesthetic impression to be achieved while also complementing the physical design and architectural features of the community. It will also be important for the sustainability of the project to consider only those plant materials that utilize minimal amounts of water. The landscape elements are planned to accent entrances and soften hard surfaces and structures. Landscape materials and elements selected should be appropriate for the climate of the area, which includes hot dry summers and moderate winters. All landscape materials are in compliance with CVWD standards. The Landscape Categories Illustrative Exhibit 3.12 identifies the varied landscape areas of the project. Examples of landscape treatments are found in Exhibits 3.13 - 3.26. The experience of both arriving and leaving the Travertine project from the northeast extension of Jefferson Street will be enhanced by the abundance of open space between the dike and the Resort/Spa property. The area between the dike and Resort/Spa will be permanent open space under the control and management of the CVWD. Proximity to the open space will heighten the exclusivity and the feeling of protection provided by this project feature. Generous setbacks will be provided along Jefferson Street and the edges of development. The open space and landscape elements will emulate the simplicity and beauty of the existing environment. The Landscape Design Guidelines section presents general imagery for entries, streetscapes, community slope, parks, trails and project edge conditions. A plant palette provides a specific list of plants that reinforces the community design character, and which is compatible with the surrounding natural open space. The plant lists are organized by plant type and are found in Table 10. The landscape concept focuses on creating a strong relationship with the built environment and the native plant community. Landscape elements will occur throughout the community and unite Travertine under a common design theme and plant palette. General guidelines and design criteria for the community landscape elements are described throughout this section. All landscape plans will be submitted to the City for review and approval. The following Exhibits display conceptual ideas of desert themes and layouts for the Travertine Project. The primary community landscape elements shown in Exhibits 3.11-3.29 are: 1. Main Community Entries, Exhibit 3.11 2. Gated Entries, Exhibit 3.12 3. Typical Landscape and Monumentation, Exhibit 3.13 4. Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 Streetscape, Exhibit 3.14 5. Loop Roads Streetscape, Exhibit 3.15 6. Residential Streetscape, Exhibit 3.16 7. Parcel Landscape Open Space, Exhibit 3.17 8. Community Slope, Exhibit 3.18 9. Open Space and Edge Conditions, Exhibit 3.19 10. On Street Trails, Exhibit 3.20 11. Off -Street Trails, Exhibit 3.21 12. Strolling Trails, Exhibit 3.22 13. Community West Park, Exhibit 3.23 14. Community East Park, Exhibit 3.24 15. Resort & Spa Landscape Concept, Exhibit 3.25 16. Resort and Spa Landscape Illustrative, Exhibit 26 17. Golf Training Facility Landscape Concept, Exhibit 3.27 18. Typical Walls and Fences, Exhibit 3.29 3-121Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 924 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.9 — Overall Landscape Illustrative ' .4P i I { q',Inr:.lLtikmrrkra� Arki - f i F i 1 - k 3-131Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 925 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.10 — Landscape Categories Illustrative 1 1 TG: rJo - — -- JeRereor Street Stealseepa Palks �I G0111 &s8� _�l TrVF- 4N 67H1 J LoopRoedstrarmcapr L - -' Nebsrellandjoepa rlanwoa 0 Baan -�� TraWt- &I SimL _7 C-0mm.nlly Slga Lantlw ib Gor Trams - on Slltm ® Tremmed 3-141Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 926 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.1 Main Community and Gates Entries The extension of the secondary arterial connection between Jefferson and Avenue 62 will be an ungated public road. Gating will occur to serve the uphill and downhill residential portions of the project, both of which are connected to the loop roads, connected to the Jefferson and Avenue 62 arterial road. See Exhibits 3.11 and 3.12. Less formal gates and monumentation are proposed at the entry to the Resort/Spa (PA-1), the golf academy (PA-11), PA-2, and PA-10. The treatment of the gated project entries and the roundabout intersections within the Travertine Specific Plan area establishes the overall community character for the project while forming a design hierarchy. These thematic features are created through a blend of hardscape elements and plant materials which make the first impression for all visitors and residents entering the community. These entry experiences will help define the character of Travertine by complementing the surrounding natural environment, as shown in Exhibit 3.13. 3.5.2 Typical Entry Landscape and Monumentation The family of community entry features starts with the main community entries, on the north end of the project on Jefferson Street and on the east side where Avenue 62 enters the community. Both are similar in form and materials and designed to give a sense of entry into the community. Both consist of a tower element faced in stone topped with a soft light source with grille work. A tile inset detail is in the center of the column. The sign panel is a long horizontal stone -faced panel with the name pinned and backlit on it. In addition, various smaller textured stone panels will accent where the column and the sign panel meet, as shown in Exhibit 3.13. The next group of monumentation is the parcel entries, and three possible types are proposed. All three pick up on the same patterns and form as the main entries but on a much smaller scale. All have planters in the walls and a panel for the parcel name. All the materials in all three entry designs will be selected for their natural look, color, and textures to compliment the desert landscaping and accent plants. 3-151Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 927 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.11 — Main Community Entries Nartfi`� ■ SOUTH MAIN ENTRY 3-161Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 928 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.12 — Gated Entries I I, 16C�HD amd EHllho - CCwmbwn 7CW i6 LEM 4 PL-90 . pum4w pq�kHtL 3-171Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 929 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.13 — Typical Entry Landscape and Monumentation t-- � •Yi3 i3i�RCl4il�l f L�FII� YYi 2 � ` tow.a,r.w+a uua.� / � iiilll 3-181Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 930 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.3 Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 streetscape The main road through Travertine is the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 corridor. The landscape for this roadway will have a landscaped median planted with rows of California Fan Palms and colorful accents and groundcovers. The California Fan Palms will provide a strong street design statement for the community. An enhanced landscape buffer will border the street on both sides outside of the right-of- way in an area that will be maintained by the Master Property Owners Association. The buffer planting area will vary in width, but have an average width of 25 feet, and will consist of desert flowering trees and colorful desert planting and groundcover with boulder groupings and strong desert accent plants. Where possible, the buffering landscape areas will utilize varying slope ratios. All the median palms will be uplit. See Exhibit 3.14. 3.5.4 Loop Road Streetscape The Loop Road will not have a median. The planting within the right-of-way will have desert theme using colorful shrubs and groundcover with desert accent plants. At intersections with local residential streets, a formal band of color accent trees will be added. Under this formal row of trees will be an understory of plants chosen for their unique colors and forms will complement the formal color tree row above. Where adjacent residential uses are in a side -on position to the Loop Street, an enhanced landscape buffer will be added. Where possible, varying slope ratios within the buffer area will be utilized. See Exhibit 3.15. 3.5.5 Residential Streetscape Overall, the residential streetscape landscape design will be a mixture of native desert plant areas in the majority of the sites along the streets. Smaller areas of more intensive planting will complement more color and lushness in planting where there are intersections, trail and sidewalk intersections, entry features, places where people would congregate, and gated entry areas. See Exhibit 3.16. 3-191Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 931 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.14 - Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 Streetscape LEGRIG j ,k�rwn5trer�Skrelrape 3-20 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 932 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.15 — Loop Collector Streetscape r � ■ Ni P ■"',$}biz.. ';x+ 'A%o - 3-211Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 933 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.16 — Residential Streetscape 3-221Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 934 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.6 Parcel Landscape Open Space Some parcels at Travertine will have small open area spaces for the residents of that parcel. These areas will have small turf areas surrounded by desert planting with desert trees. Each of these open spaces will have a small shade structure. Specimen desert accent planting will have prominent spots in each of these spaces. See Exhibit 3.17 3.5.7 Community Slope The 5:1 slope will provide the opportunity to have a natural desert look on the slopes. The trails in these slope areas will have a band of more intensive desert planting lining them. Along the trail slopes, trail stops are provided for seating and shade. The more extensive open area slopes will have native soil surface worked and prepared to be more naturalistic, with boulders placed in natural patterns. The planting here will be hydroseeded with a native desert shrub mix. Native desert trees will be added, and they will be on irrigation. See Exhibit 3.18. 3.5.8 Open Space and Edge Conditions The goal of the Travertine community is to blend into the natural desert surroundings. The edge/transitional landscape treatment will be an integral part of this goal. The landscape that surrounds the community is native untouched desert, and then a band of transitional landscape planting will occur that will have native plant reseeding and native tree planting. This edge/transitional planting area will vary in width according to location and ease the look into the community planting which will have a higher density of desert planting. See Exhibit 3.19. 3-231Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 935 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.17 — Parcel Landscape Open Space 5X -If 4• f COMM UN11Y SHADE STRUCTURE �•arc�l Lance apa •�qan Spa« 3-241Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 936 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit I28-Community Slope Landscape +� � ■ � .re � � . . -�� »fro- , ;3. �a� .... \ i LEGEW Cw.murli:p Lmdsc.pe 3-251Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 937 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.19 — Open Space and Edge Conditions 3-261Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 938 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.9 On -Street, Off -Street and Strolling Trails All trails in Travertine will have planting adjacent to them. Depending on the location and type, the planting will vary in density and use of color desert shrubs and accents. Trails will have shade areas provided by groves of trees and in some place's structures also. The strolling trail through the middle of the community will be the most intensely planted and also have an adjacent open space lawn that lines one area. Public and private trails are located throughout the community. The proposed system of trails and paths throughout the Specific Plan area forms a centerpiece of the park and recreation plan. The trail system provides a link for walkers, joggers and cyclists, connecting neighborhoods, parks and open spaces. See Exhibits 3.20, 3.21 and 3.22. 3.5.10 Public Hiking Trails Public hiking trails surround the perimeter of Travertine and can be accessed from the staging areas located on the south side of Jefferson Street near Avenue 62. These trails are routed along some of the most scenic locations in the area and connect to the existing public hiking trail system at the Boo Hoff Trail. See Exhibit 3.23. 3-27 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 939 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.20 — On Street Trails kii. M1 raor. - On Street 3-281Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 940 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.21 — Off Street Trails i.Oklf TILAO s � *_ MUM 5mm wvd, I m"m" caNlr..r..-,awy II. + �� I 12' I �I i 'll CA AMD LOCO mf! 5ECDOW W —k kt I � kFi.F ill `--^ CommunrttA-endLaopTral InIPm3rirpmLor Trail _ T...d INTI.1Z -ONNEc'TOR TRAIL MOM" UWWAL eft P\WS 3-291Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 941 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.22 - Strolling Trail STRO W NG IRAIL PFD�STRIAr%r SHADE :� 4EGEFr, Truk {,. 5unal 3-301Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 942 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.11 Community West and East Parks Community parks are located at each end of the spine trail and will provide turf in limited areas for recreation and play. Shade trees, benches and picnic areas, tot lots and dog parks will make these passive parks an enjoyable space for the residents to meet. The community parks will supplement the pocket parks located within the individual residential developments, see Exhibits 3.23 and 3.24. A community clubhouse is proposed for the community park north of Jefferson Street. Cross-section 3, Exhibit 3.33, shows the natural condition along the projects' western boundary to the development. The multi -use trail runs along the western boundary and separates the natural environment from the project's graded slopes. Slopes along this edge are generally graded at a 2:1 ratio; along with the outer edge, they will also be reinforced for flood protection. Cross-section 11, Exhibit 3.37, is located on Jefferson Street between the two -project roundabouts. Again, the slope gradients are softened to a 5:1 ratio to provide large setbacks to residential uses. Cross -sections 12 and 13, Exhibit 3.37, show the spine trail that connects both community parks. This trail will be 10 feet wide and will accommodate pedestrians and cyclists to provide off-street access to the community amenities, the loop road system and the generous setbacks to residential development. Slope gradients on either side of the street are at a 5:1 ratio to allow for landscape and distance to separate homes from the street. 3-311Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 943 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.23 — Community West Park J'. J AN up, Community West Park Approximate 4.7 Acres �b 3-32 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 944 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.24 — Community East Park .0�Muml-uti nrA6lli=70 �W.Wlfflq"" 7 ti Nv"PHUM [UMMIX KqAUJx- PYE:rr LjWll MINT MONIA111 WLW I'M I I LPL 17 N*7. LUErn i _ Pam Communitv East Park Approximate 8.8 Acres LiALKAIRLULL. 2 3-33 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 945 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.12 Resort and Spa The North resort area of the community will have an oasis -type landscape concept. Areas of intensive use will have a lush green landscape design. These areas would be pool areas, dining, recreational areas, and resort guest garden areas. Also, the villa area pool, recreational, and guest garden areas would be designed with this oasis type of landscape design. A lush desert landscape would link these oasis areas of the resort and the villas and other vital areas of the resort. In addition, a native low water use landscape design would be used in the less visited and outer areas of the resort. It would be used on guest access trails to the undisturbed desert areas to experience the native desert. See Exhibit 3.25 and 3.26. Exhibit 3.25 — Resort and Spa Landscape Illustrative `:OR7H FN'My ItUWPIT RCK415 __ 1LAAh4. wwp WJ CWLALMOUN AIN o P. Su)krMArKcamPI Fx NVELLNM CENrCR 3-341Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 946 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.26 — Resort and Spa Landscape Concepts 4'..' .. Aft - 3-35IPage TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 947 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.13 Golf Academy / Practice Facility The south golf academy area will be a low water use native desert landscape design overall. Low water - use plants will be used extensively in sites not devoted to turf for the golf academy functions. Ancillary areas of the facility will have a mini oasis look with limited use of turf for social functions and formal desert low water use gardens for guests to explore surrounding the banquet venue. See Exhibit 3.27. Exhibit 3.27 — Golf Training Facility Landscape Concept '------ --- --- ---- LJ% U E 62 MAI L'3T.;.f I �Z6 hR FA JEI FAGLLITY.S NV WEDDING {r1kG6%' FOL. R HN F ML4C91(F FACILI Y,�- 1 60Lr . -LALNENW f � 3-361Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 948 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.14 Typical Fences and Walls For purposes of this section, "fence" or "wall" means any type of fence, wall, retaining wall, sound attenuation wall, screen or windscreen. The terms "fence" and "wall" are used interchangeably in this section to mean any or all of the preceding structures. All fencing and wall use are subject to the City of La Quinta municipal 9.60.030 Fences and walls and should reflect the materials and design of the approved home facade. The treatment of the wall should match the architectural treatment of the residential building, or the walls and/or fences that are an integral part of the garden design. Location of fences and walls and examples of materials that may be used for fences and walls are found in Exhibit 3.28 and 3.29. Low freestanding courtyard walls, gateposts and entry monuments under six (6) feet high may be integrated into the driveway or auto court -design. Walls, fences, terraces and outdoor landscape areas should appear to be extensions of indoor areas and the building architecture, rather than as independent elements. Walls shall be architecturally compatible with the house and built of similar materials and colors "Drive through" archways or beams may be permitted on a case -by -case basis with the approval of the City. The design concept, therefore, is to make fences and walls blend with both the architecture and the landscape, while still providing privacy and security consistent with the needs of individual lot owners. Fences and walls placed on lots shall be an extension of the colors and materials of the adjacent residential architecture, visually compatible and be of materials related to the land (such as stone). They may occur as an extension of house living spaces, to frame courtyards or to direct views. Wrought iron fencing styles and downslope fencing techniques are encouraged to maintain views. The following requirements apply to all fences and walls within the Travertine Community: 1. Walls and fences should be kept as low as possible while performing their intended function. Wall height should be minimized to avoid a "fortress" appearance. The design of fences and walls, as well as the materials used, should be consistent with the overall housedesign. 2. Appropriate materials for walls and fencing include tube steel, river rock stone veneer, glass, split face block and slumpstone block. 3. Fence and wall colors should match or complement the color of the building. 4. Tops of retaining walls should blend with natural contours. Ends of walls should not end abruptly, but are to transition into existing landforms, rock outcroppings and vegetation. 5. Plant materials are encouraged to be woven in and around fences to help fences merge with the landscape. 6. Adjacent to a Nonresidential Zone or Uses, the maximum fence height between a residential zone or use and a nonresidential zone or use shall be eight feet. Prohibited fence materials include the use of barbed wire, razor wire, chain link, or similar materials. Chain link fencing is permitted for temporary construction fences when authorized by a minor use permit issued in accordance with Section 9.210.025. Said minor use permit shall not be approved until a permit for grading, or construction, has been filed for, whichever comes first. 3-371Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 949 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.28 — Conceptual Wall Type Schedule m 1 .END 5''hen Fence r Camdnebon Fence and "I oawwdy 51wXjXd wa1i 3-38 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 950 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.29 - Overall Wall Plan C YYWUNRf'WLDLIFEF15"CE �r S7,SNDARD PARCEL PH- V CER hm4 .L &EGn -- vNlM.li LFas�it'Or��WI!k •s5 J-AC%LAjix ..: ! k'A*M EAiY l.= W UL. NmM 2= 0 G'k hM 1b .. 5' sf3C3Pr f TTC L ItOIT- Y UC WALL HAM YAM r9CL Fim[l 7AMAM-NCr -'hbG rLLCGf riFL R.1J-L �rIXC[KLI�r . F ff: YViEh bl•+1U'4G SFeP Fh d�RUGC�iYaL ER—WmE UGHE VW C6'i-71 F15'�+14ks�kiS+ILr�Cc.��h a' W cLuFm ai--L"r, TLV&+C1 "mD -FLLM INWLx., Y+L 1 � IIIIr :IOU, - i� 3-391Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 951 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.15 Landscape Cross -Sections The following cross -sections depict the relationship between the slope areas and the buildable areas of the project. The majority of the cross -sections show the Native Seed Planting areas of slopes. These areas would be fine graded to match the existing desert and have boulder outcroppings. In addition, only native desert trees planted with a density to match the current desert and a native non -irrigated desert seed mix would be installed in these slope areas. Other cross -sections have the treatments stated above and the Transitional Desert Planting that would line the pedestrian trails. These areas will have more native plants and shrubs and would be on an irrigation system. Tree placement in all cross -sections would be driven by matching tree density of the surrounding desert areas, views from home lots, and blending into adjacent areas more extensively planted, such as the Transitional Zone. 1. Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Interior, Exhibit 3.30 2. Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Exterior, Exhibit 3.31 3. Landscape Cross -Section 1 and 2, Exhibit 3.32 4. Landscape Cross -Sections 3 and 4, Exhibit 3.33 5. Landscape Cross -Sections 5, Exhibit 3.34 6. Landscape Cross -Sections 6, Exhibit 3.35 7. Landscape Cross -Sections 7, 8, and 9, Exhibit 3.36 8. Landscape Cross -Sections 10, 11, 12, and 13, Exhibit 3.37 3-401Paac TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 952 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.30 — Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Interior LE GERD Sac#4n�lr.�s _ 47 � �,.kL, 73 i 3-411Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 953 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.31 — Landscape Cross -Sections Key Map — Exterior 3-42 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 954 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.32 — Landscape Cross -Section 1 and 2 I'l { urarf 31upe r mou SJope Elm'!t SECTION I Slapo Raid Vill u Fk-T. 160 SECTION I CON'Pl) 5101e IlEility RA.fion Rjou R-N l PL iA K i'rw ral SECTION 2 blo 4"YIDS wopf yffin Caeal 1lountain PL je fCMn Stn`ca Ekv. �14' EJeV. 230' 3-43JPage TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 955 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.33 — Landscape Cross -Sections 3 and 4 aturA Slope Rnad 51npe I.DR FIc'. 455' DL I r— Elm 455' DL N,xt urad skp4 'Natural Rcsm-ior -- MWWall EJe,-. 4 25' SEGNON 4 DL DE DL EJcv.355 -� EDL — Ln�. 3C•3' Exist* NmuraL SLopr Ptwnior I SlkTv Natural Flu?. M, ` VISE Wall SECTION 4 - CONT'D 3-441Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 956 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.34 — Landscape Cross -Section 5 5lopc ! SECTION 5 `la[ u ral Martin= Rark SECTION 5 CONT'D S"r 3-451Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 957 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.35 — Landscape Cross -Section 6 j1dLt;rxm SUM LDR rdLL"MY Street Elcv. ❑D' EJev.1lg EIeV. Ill EI44'.113 Rear] EJev. Slay - Wiley SMpr 10 119 rciAtum SECTIOLN h Eiev IZY Ross Elev. J 11v 5EC±TION 6 CONTD Ekv. 120' I Elev. I29. - - Slope — R%md Ek. Slope 12?' 3-461Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 958 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.36 — Landscape Cross -Section 7, 8, and 9 + RrC:kll*)`� Fbs�n Finry Elev.25' L3ndsrapc� np" Srmc* JERCEwn styra Elc+'. 50' SEMON 7 PL Wall PubJju DrkvLng Rangy F=ilJzy Elev. 4? FOIq Lands;mpef (Fcn Sparc NOR ?natural f'IL'% 43 Shope SECTION B Ret•teaarlan Ce met Buy. 63 SFI TION 9 DL 12' PL Tpljj l f}I4Yr}L' Natural Fxi�rir�g Fein ELM. 13 3-471Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 959 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.37 — Landscape Cross -Sections 10, 11, 12, and 13 L3 PI_ Trail L7L R.Lsurt Elev 109 f lie�urt �ca�ry - —� Entry SECTION 10 L I'�R Slaps Ells. L47 jefferWLI SEWd L-J£v_ L35 SECTION it TraO fxlu[J� LDR skpv Eky.140' SEC1 L0N 12 Trail Trad SECTION 13 Cl WD Ruthargc Gukn Natural 1 DR]DR L[%:v. (,'_ I LDR EJev.145 N1DR ['a.%co NIDIZ Elev. Ys Elea. �8 3-48 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 960 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.6 Planting Zones The project has three planting area types. These are Native Seed Revegetation, Transitional Desert Planting, and Enhanced Desert Planting. See Exhibit 3.38. The Native Seed Planting Area is the area that links the undisturbed desert areas surrounding the project to the disturbed interior of the project. These areas are the slopes and places that will have significant restoration grading. The grading will return the sites to a more natural native desert with boulder massing and grading, raking, and water settling. After the water settles and final fine grading is completed, a native seed mix of desert plants native to the surrounding area will be applied. Native trees will be planted in patterns and density to match the surrounding desert. Only the trees will be on irrigation. The Transitional Desert Planting areas will stitch the Native Seed Planting Areas and the Enhanced Desert Planting together. These areas will be associated with lining paths, the main roads, trails and used as a buffer to the Enhanced Desert Planting. Desert low water use shrubs, trees, and groundcovers will give shade, color, and interest to these areas where people walk and hike. The plant density for these areas will be 50% less than the Enhanced Desert Planting's areas. The Enhanced Desert Planting Area will have double the planting density of the Transitional Desert Planting. All plants will be low -water -use desert plants but will be augmented with more lush moderate water use plants still associated with the landscapes found in desert planting designs. Some will have small lawn areas. The areas related to this planting design are the public areas where people will congregate, the trail ends, community center areas, traffic circles, all entry features, some selected areas of the North resort area, and the South Golf facility. 3,7 Plant Material Guidelines It is the intent of these guidelines to provide flexibility and diversity in plant material selection, while maintaining a limited palette in order to give greater unity and thematic identity to the community. The landscape areas within Travertine focus on the use of plant materials characteristic of Coachella Valley materials and colors. It is important to make a strong connection with the natural open space surrounding the community, while also providing a pleasing landscape for common areas within the streetscapes and off-street trail areas. The informal landscape theme of the spine trail will include benches, and areas to relax and enjoy the views of the surrounding mountains and valleys. Native and non-native trees will provide shaded areas and shrubs and grasses will add color and texture. See Table 10 for a list of prohibited invasive ornamental plants. The Travertine landscape plan will be limited to the plant palette contained in Table 10 which is in compliance with CVWD requirements for low-water landscaping and reflects the desert environment of the surrounding areas. The goal of the landscape plan is to achieve water conservation through the design of the plan and use of native materials. The limited selection of materials used in simple, significant composition, complementary to adjacent common landscape area and reinforcing the individual architectural and site setting is encouraged. Overall plant material selection for given project areas shall have compatible, drought resistant characteristics. Irrigation programming can then be designed to minimize water application for the entire landscape setting and will require smart landscaping systems. Sustainability is a major consideration of the City of La Quinta and the region as a whole. When possible, rapidly renewable materials will be considered and used in the construction of the buildings in Travertine. It also will be important to consider the construction waste generated from the site and prevent raw materials from entering the landfills by minimizing waste and utilizing recycling programs. 3-49 1 P a g c TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 961 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit 3.38 - Planting Zones �,.Y i .5 _ `hlU Thk L•L:L•'I .'.S ION 7RIi4;nikiNAL rl,fcI I' ti rlvt, ENFLnhCEL?PP, KI Pi. }I.JIM, ;i ' I r �• 3� �I' I'.I � 4 � I M1..S 1 4! { .4 ,�� i. III— L EGErip I4ayq 5ee4 "e9e1e1k1i IPwIL7ewlPkrUnw — Enhancad Gesarl Panliv 3-501Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 962 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Table 10: Landscape Palette Test type Botanical Name Common Name Trees Acacia sp. Acacia Bauhinia sp. Bauhinia Cercocarpus sp. Cercocarpus Chilopsis sp. Chilopsis Chitalpa sp. Chitalpa Citrus sp. Citrus Dalea so. Dalea Ebenopsis Ebenopsis Fraxinus so. Fraxinus Laqerstroemia so. Lagerstroemia Lvsiloma so. Lvsiloma Olneva sp. Olneva Parkinsonia sp. Parkinsonia Prosopis sp. Prosopis Pistacia sp. Pistacia Quercus sp. Quercus Rhus sp. Rhus Schinus sp. Schinus Sophora so. Sophora Thevetia so. Thevetia Tipuana so. Tipuana Vitex so. Vitex Palms Bismarkia so. Bismarkia Butia so. Butia Palm Brahea asp. Brahea Palm Chamaerops so. Chamaerops Palms Cvcas so. Cvcas Phoenix so. Phoenix Palm Washinqtonia so. Washingtonia Palm Shrubs Abutilon so. Abutilon Alvogne so. Alvogne Anisacanthus so. AnisacanthusAnt Bouqainvillea so. Bougainvillea Baileva so. Bailvea Buddleia so. Buddleia Calliandra so. Calliandra Callistemon so. Callistemon Carrissa so. Carissa Carvopteris so. Carvopteris Cordia so. Cordia Dalea so. Dalea 3-511Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 963 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Dodonea so. Dodonaea Encelia so. Encelia Eremophila so. Eremophila Ericameria so. Ericameria Erioqonum sp. Eriogonum Euphorbia sp. Euphorbia Hamelia sp. Hamelia Justicia sp. Justicia Lantana sp. Lantana Larrea sp. Larrea Leucaena sp. Leucaena Leucophvllum so. Leucophvllum Rosemarinus so. Rosemary Ruellia so. Ruellia Russelia so. Russelia Salvia so. Sage Senna so. Cassia Simmondsia so. Simmondsia Taqetes so. Tagetes Tecoma so. Tecoma Verbena so. Verbena Wedelia so. Wedelia Espaliers and Vines Bouqainvillea so. Bougainvillea Antiqonon so. Antigonon Calliandra so. Calliandra Gelsemium so. Gelsemium Pvracantha so. Prvracantha Trachelopsermum so. Trachelospermum Desert Accents Aqave so. Agave Aloe so. Aloe Atriplex so. Atri Alex Bailey so. Bailvea Bulbine so. Bulbine CalvIophus so. Calvlophus Caesalpina so. Caesalpinia Cereus so. Cerus Dasvlirion so. Dasvlirion Dracenea draco Dragon Tree Echinocactus so. Echinocactus Euphorbia so. Euphorbia Fouquieria so. Fouqueiria Hesperaloe so. Hesperaloe Manqave so. Mangave Nolina so. Nolina Opuntia sp. Opuntia 3-521Panc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 964 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Pachvicereus so. Pachvicereus Pedilanthus so. Pedilanthus Penstemon so. Penstemon Yucca so. Yucca Groundcover Acacia so. Acacia Acalvpha so. Acalvpha Ambrosia so. Ambrosia Conoclinium so. Conoclinium Convolvulus so. Convolvulus Dalea so. Dalea Gazania so. Gazania Guara so. Guara Glandularia so. Glandularia Malephora so. Malephora Oenothera so. Oenothera Portulacaria so. Portulacaria Psilostrophe so. Psilostrophe Rosmarinus so. Rosemary Ruellia so. Ruellia Senecio so. Senicio Verbena so. Verbena Grasses Muhlenberqia so. Muhlenbergia 3-531Panc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 965 3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Table 11: Prohibited Invasive Ornamental Plants Botanical Name Arundo donax Atriplex semibaccata Avena barbata Avena fatua Brassica tournefortii2 Bromus madritensis ssp. rubensl Bromus tectorum2 Cortaderia iubata [syn.C. atacamensis] Cortaderia dioica [syn. C. selloanai Descurainia sophia Eichhornia crassipes Elaegnus anqustifolia Foeniculum vulqare Hirschfeldia incana Lepidium latifolium Lolium multiflorum Nerium oleander Nicotiana qlaucal Parkinsonia aculeatal Pennisetum clandestinum Pennisetum setaceum2 Pin us sp. Ricinus communis Salsola traqus Schinus molle Schismus arabicus Schismus barbatus Stipa capensis Tamarix spp. (all species) Taeniatherum caput-medusae Tribulus terrestris Washinqtonia robusta Common Name giant reed Australian saltbush slender wild oat wild oat African or Saharan mustard red brome cheat grass Jubata grass or Andean pampas grass pampas grass tansy mustard water hyacinth Russian olive sweet fennel short -pod mustard perennial pepperweed Italian ryegrass oleander tree tobacco Mexican palo verde Kikuyu grass fountain grass Pine castorbean Russian thistle Peruvian pepper tree Mediterranean grass Saharan grass no common name tamarisk or salt cedar Medusa -head puncturevine Mexican fan palm 3-54 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 966 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN This Section describes the infrastructure development plan, requirements and implementation as well as the general intent and comprehensive framework of the infrastructure development within the Travertine development. 4.1 Circulation Plan Description Exhibit 4.1 illustrates the conceptual Circulation system proposed to serve the Travertine community. The community at buildout will be served by two access points: (1) the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a Modified Secondary Arterial, south of Avenue 58, and (2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial west of Monroe Street. An emergency vehicle access road (EVA) will provide a secondary point of access for emergency use only, during the first phase of builder construction, or up to the first 600 units. The EVA will extend from the southerly termination of Madison Street to the interior of the project to provide emergency access prior to the full extension of Jefferson and Avenue 62. The required timing for the opening of the EVA will be established by conditions of approval on subdivision maps as a function of the pace, intensity and location of development within the Specific Plan. During the Grading Phase A stage (discussed more fully in Section 4.4 Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan, herein), Avenue 62 will cross Dike No.4 and extend westerly towards the Travertine project boundary. This crossing will require a license, secured by the City of La Quinta, and approved by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and approval from the County of Riverside. This spine roadway, which curves through the project, is shown on Exhibit 4.1. Jefferson Street will be extended south of Avenue 58 through the Coral Canyon development, a portion of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and continue through Travertine to meet the extension of Avenue 62. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1, The Jefferson Street/ Avenue 62 spine road will be a modified secondary arterial road configuration between the northern project boundary (as the southerly extension of Jefferson) and the eastern project boundary (as the westerly extension of Avenue 62). Avenue 62 will be improved as a Modified Secondary Arterial east of the project to Monroe Street. The Travertine community land uses are oriented on both sides of the Jefferson Street / Avenue 62 spine roadway, with local loop collector roads emanating from the spine roadway via round-abouts to provide access to the neighborhoods as illustrated on Exhibit 4.1. Loop collector roads will have a typical right- of-way of 70 feet, with curb -to -curb distances of 40 feet with 9-foot curb adjacent landscaped parkways and a 6-foot-wide pedestrian walkway on both sides. Exhibits 4.2 and 4.3 identify the typical street cross sections and standards. A detail of the round -about is shown in Exhibit 4.4. Local roads are also planned to be utilized and will be comprised of a curb -to -curb dimension of 32 feet for single loaded streets, which allows for parking on one side of the street and 41 feet, for double loaded streets which allows for parking on both sides of the street. These residential local roads will provide a landscape easement at a minimum of 12 feet on each side of the street and 15 feet to residential building. An access road will be dedicated for entry to Section 5 for any future uses. The road will connect from the loop road of the Travertine project to Section 5, that will be defined as an easement and entitled by the Applicant to allow access from the project, during the same Construction Phase as the loop road is built. 4-11Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 967 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN The project neighborhoods will be gated for privacy. These gates will be located at the intersections of the loop roads and Jefferson Street or Avenue 62. Exhibit 4.5 shows the location of the gates off the spine roadway and the typical gate configuration is shown on Exhibit 4.6. The Resort / Spa entry at Jefferson will also be gated. Gating of individual neighborhoods within the residential Planning Areas is permitted. The location of any proposed gates will be reviewed and approved by the city as part of either a tentative tract map application or as a part of a site plan review application. Exhibit 4.6 exhibits the typical landscape of the entries to the development from both Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street as well as typical entry gates for the residential portions of the development off of the spine road and on the loop road entries of the project. The ultimate drainage plans for Specific Plan area's conveyance and retention/detention onsite will determine the placement and extent of bridges and/or culvert crossings needed to maintain all-weather access for all roadways. The Construction Phase 1 stage (see Section 5.6 of this Specific Plan) will include facilities of approximately 14.1-acres that will be located both north and south of the prolongation of Avenue 62 and will outlet water into the impound area against Dike No. 4. 4-21Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 968 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.1 — Circulation Plan ' �ta•IIl i } ' kiclwuoi„ o�loa+ — ii 1 a lb I � � _ _ ALeMAE 6d 4 Y .x j• —_.� F.r �al-pSE1N1!_41 5 r 1 •�� I+iarJnuc� i LEGEND Rim J8 NNOA511ol low"V6 U E]U RC.-Adaoul � Energenu• 5'olmie- P.meem ® LJop C,(.Ie pr F-1v delr! Local Iraeds lsii�o Av em R: W Ar 4-31Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 969 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.2 — Roadway Sections A, B, & C 1i I� i L L 27, 1fX L VaMea 1-oci y e' Z a I, a 4 12. � r- y 10 4 a• j I' a'yerree 61 ml T+aS+I�T?51� Mkn. jy�R�r on* Madtw LWO -P-L-W €fin Biro Lab 'f — MQMFK q 4 PIFNWK W rM � I - li I r x 7 rilx. g �• r1 � $ ff $• & l r. ". L—m—W n, T.. H I ra,al I [.enueo�e g4 _ Cl a II Lane L911t, OW P►�o-eu LP , evRd* uw" Lent Q1,?'itir"-Ww*! {i 1.8 Q4nld SiYFWr II HiYFv4 4 7' t Po.r.v.,�,h.b awn,Yy wm H. YMrIJ A' b a46W - FI. u y4' b WL �1��a�u��,7 a ,U eae Tm#4 ze" aye Lnnm Lwm ih~ Lnnr Lan f 31dew�It aeCurb loC'drb WdaaPmWanjLFt-Urd3r �.rre n�.0 on leoi+ urr,p Section BRIDGE SECTION BRIDGE SECTION 4-41Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 970 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.3 — Roadway Sections D, E, & F 60' r- ZAWWJ ,3 1 MAX. t 5 L 5' B' 12' 17' 8' 6' 5 3;1 MAX. Lend gp$ Travel Travel LW490ape Buffer Wi@Jk Lane Lane Walk gaffer Parking Parking SecthDn D - LOCAL ROAD R N 401 IJw 51, unllty — Utility � rtant I I :Ea�pmerl! P2*ing Travel Lanes Re rking Section E - LOCAL ROAD RM RW Z1' i I i r 40.5' 10.5' Travel Lanes Ph I j y I I ° Y:1 k i 1 1 2' L3, 5 5 f Shoulder Travel StkoWder Lanes Section G - MADI SON EV - 4-51Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 971 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.4 — Roundabout sTMET kVM KARMHG 4 _ `STYE IN3ki 9>'. Id PAWED PLAWrO OYAAPNITY7C EFIELEMENT STONE MALL R4V iSP %W � � I 4 w Pori.Ko (c i -� _ ♦Y Perkna °� lti+�i I � fte�e.rJ L� iw91�dSJ �— Glaec �I Sko Ls�o �°�en GIB h Bkpisnp Fiaarnlrcv�g kof Ria:ndafr�] Ikor IA�Ex tral NY.ih 1r� h 4-61Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 972 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.5 — Street Gated Entry Section & Details ww RM +I I mo 1s• f - I c tly 24' 26 � 14' I 14, I i a. � 1fl � 6' Travel Gale Travo Medhly, TravelParigmy pw RV LAfrrr House L.nna L$ng meandering sldewalk or hleamierng Sidewalk or- kluliii-Purpose Trnil AhjG-Purpadis Trail Er7aY i EW kkj C4FM.11rnrTQKR EL OSIff q-X+�TI.E 779�4 IS. 5i 1J r4+ 40 4 .r 1 74' - � T 4-71Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 973 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.6 — Typical Gated Entries 4-81Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 974 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.2 Water Coachella Valley Water District (CV W D) has jurisdiction over domestic water service to the Travertine project. Currently, domestic water service lines exist in the area of the intersection of Avenue 60 and from the Jefferson Street extension and Avenue 62. During the Construction Phase 1 stage (see Section 5.6 Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing Plan), water utilities will be connected prior to any home building. One well will be constructed during the Grading Phase A stage, located off the Travertine project site. Currently there are ongoing discussions with local parcel owners, CVWD and developers, to locate the future offsite well sites. The well sites necessary to serve the project have been analyzed by CVWD. The initial number of well sites based on the criteria outlined in CVWD's Development Design Manual (Aug. 2018 version) section 5.6.1 for this project is equivalent to up five well sites at maximum. The final number of well sites that will actually be needed to serve the site will be determined from a development agreement between CVWD and the developer based on extenuating circumstances for providing alternative means and measures of water service to not only the project but to the region. The process for acquisition of well sites will be done by a private purchase by the developer, where the environmental clearance coincident with the project will be generic for all typical well sites located within CVWD's jurisdiction. Those site - specific well sites will be purchased by the developer and ultimately dedicated to CVWD. Exhibit 4.7 identifies the conceptual on -site water service facilities that are required to provide domestic water to the community. As noted above, wells are required to be improved and/or constructed to serve the project site, with one well operable and available prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Use and Occupancy. Additional facilities will include two water reservoirs and booster stations to collect the well water and store it at elevation to provide the required water pressure for the site. The project site will be served with a thirty -inch main line within Jefferson Street/Madison Street alignments. Twelve -inch and smaller lines will then feed off the main line to serve the individual developments along these public streets. Precise locations, alignments, and sizes of water service facilities will be determined at the Tentative and Final Map stage of development, per City and CVWD regulations and standards. Irrigation water for landscaping and any golf uses is intended to be non -potable Coachella Canal water that is available to the site. Infrastructure will be installed in Grading Phase A stage to convey the water to the site and to ensure that the non -potable water remains separate from the potable water system. In the event that this water is not available to the Travertine development, the onsite irrigation wells will be utilized for future irrigation. In the Phase A Grading stage (see Section 5.6 Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing Plan), prior to any building construction, the project must have the necessary fire flows to all hydrants in addition to providing two points of access. The project will provide all wet and dry utilities from Avenue 62 to the point of connection for various builder phases. The project will have to adequately secure all common area landscape prior to construction. See Exhibit 4.7 4-91Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 975 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.7 — Conceptual Water Plan STRE KET NAF • �.-�__= * i i EAST I i L: I LOOPS "t MST jp ' 1 r: ` BEE VE E2 Irf*-RT 2 �"j fl Z RIE 425 Z-OsIE 335 �#5nincr +—..— HoA SM& AVE 152 INSERT &OOS7IER0F ;r AVENUE 192 , 2f' R'MW R LECENL 6esgrok Pmr 5lpemw P-Ipoeed Ar:m I,,Is nmDO[xslL`wIWI YIr1 PIWased ma". Pure �" +Y,+9v1yal45y IM I+l� 4-101Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 976 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.3 Sewer The project site is presently served by the CVWD. Plans to extend the sewer mains along Avenue 62 and Jefferson Street to the project are in development. The conceptual on -site sewer facilities and improvements are shown on Exhibit 4.8. The facilities are comprised of a series of eight -inch sewer lines serving the individual developments and flowing into the main sewer line located within the Jefferson Street/spine road alignment. The main sewer line increases in size as it proceeds eastward, ranging in size from eight inches on the west side to 15 inches at Madison Street, where the line exits the project site. Final design criteria, location, alignment and sizing of sewer facilities will be determined at the tentative and final map stage of development, pursuant to the processes and specifications of the City and CVWD. 4-111Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 977 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.8 — Conceptual Sewer Plan LVAYID F---%, Cum[ Mountailk it '4 5AET Rock NOWz + r ALOWOF62 4-12 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 978 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4,4 Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan The project site slopes gently in a downslope direction from west to east and is subject to two kinds of drainage conditions: alluvial fan flow and incised drainage corridors along inactive fans. The primary existing drainage condition is alluvial fan flow; eight canyon drainages contribute runoff to the overall project site. The major contributors of runoff to the planned development area are Devil Canyon, Middle North Canyon, Middle South Canyon, and Rock Avalanche Canyon. Flows from these canyons and other drainages continue across the site and ultimately drain into the reservoir created by Dike No. 4. Exhibit 4.9 illustrates the conceptual grading of the plan and outlines the areas of cut and fill. Exhibit 4.10 demonstrates the proposed gradient of the slopes within the project. 4-131Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 979 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.9 - Conceptual Balance Grading Plan y ' f Tom--• � i fYr3f�'Sfl5 �F��f78`f5.4 Cm w rarw, fir' R AVEM GO_ 4-141Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 980 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.10 - Slope Ratio Diagram A VGNJE W _ a ff �IkvUSi �, {r. tort Muunlain D&e s " y 'I I � k�z Mutkoz Rmmk Slide w '11 F L LEGEND SIoPo-5 Shpo-3 P sbg l P 4-151Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 981 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.4.1 Drainage Plan The approach to the management of drainage in the Specific Plan is to concentrate the planned development within the inactive fan areas where possible and provide a perimeter flood protection system around the development site to provide the necessary level of protection. The primary watershed solution (Exhibit 4.11 and 4.12) illustrates flows being conveyed around the site in order to pass flows to the downstream off -site areas along Dike No. 4 in a manner that avoids flooding risks to the downstream areas. Project implementation will require management of active alluvial fan flow conditions on the western and southern edges of the planned development area. Alluvial fan flows potentially impact the entire western and southern edges of the planned development area. To manage this condition, it is determined that a perimeter flood protection barrier will be used along the western and southern boundaries. The barrier will consist of a raised edge condition with a slope lining to protect against scour and erosion. The edge will be elevated above the water surface elevations associated with the 100-year storm event and will be designed based on a worst -case flow scenario assuming an active alluvial flow condition. These flood protection barriers solve four problems: they will intercept alluvial fan flows, incised canyon flows, and will control associated debris load; and they will allow planned conveyance facilities around the project. The proposed conveyance features will direct off -site flows, once intercepted by the barriers, around the perimeter of the development by means of open channel swales to safe outlets on the north and south sides of the development. The site itself will be raised along these edge barriers to avoid the creation of levee like conditions. The offsite run-off from Devil Canyon will be distributed in the north through the existing Guadalupe Dike system to Dike No. 4. Offsite watershed runoff from the Middle Canyons (North and South) and Rock Avalanche Canyon will be intercepted and conveyed along the southern portion of the site to Dike No. 4 south of the proposed Avenue 62 crossing. As seen under the primary drainage solution; Exhibit 4.11, flows will be conveyed around the site on the west and south boundaries and re -distributed on the east along Dike No. 4. The Conceptual Hydrology plan for the Travertine development ensures that all residents of the community, as well as downstream facilities and properties, will be protected from periodic flooding that is experienced in the region. Exhibit 4.11 also identifies the existing flows that come on to the project site, generally from the south and west. The diagrams also identify the various conceptual storm facilities (perimeter barriers, on -site drainage) that are required to transmit storm runoff flows. More detailed engineering and design, consistent with design standards established by the City and the CVWD, will be completed at the final map stages of development, resulting in the precise location, alignment, and sizing of all drainage facilities. 4-161Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 982 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Exhibit 4.11 - Conceptual Hydrology Plan I wt _ . r — .•i •�ti c+t I G{k'ti^915' ' 'k' . u�P0S5GJEFklR9R*' Corul GUAR LUFF CREEK ]N�uuriaLtDIVERSION ❑IDES MAP I `• - - I ~ k S � r 5 + - � � 7+ rJ iIOF• 4 ' I' T j 4 LEGEND Evicting "WiNaWdiAE Penn61BtF ,d8WOr m H,IP6 PAdd E--!Ang Sheel Flue © On -Silo Dmiri po- Ylehr"d Diversion WOUP gean aiF!rlA Cf OUTLET PIPES FROM B,ASIM 4-171Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 983 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.4.2 Stormwater Management Plan Before any construction, a Stormwater management plan will be created and finalized as part of the Construction Phase A stage. For the Stormwater management plan, the applicant will finalize the calculation of Standard Project Flood (SPF), 100-year and 25-year runoff rates for on -site and off -site drainages. The project must have hydraulic analysis utilizing refined runoff rates to determine design water surface elevations and flow velocities along the perimeterflood barriers, Guadalupe Canal, and Dike No. 4; in addition, the stormwater management plan must accomplish the following: 1. Evaluation of flow velocities on a reach -by -reach basis to determine a) lining requirements in terms of materials and lining thickness, b) potential for deposition of sediments, and c) the need for channel stabilization to control scour. 2. Create adjustments to flood protection system configurations (in terms of barrier and levee heights and bridge crossing widths) and refine the hydraulic analysis. Determine the optimum configuration of channels, barriers, and levees with necessary containment and erosion control structures which will provide the 100-year flood protection and blend effectively with natural environment (where appropriate) and the proposed development. 3. Prepare detailed designs and specifications for facilities including containment levees, erosion protection (natural appearing where possible), and channel stabilization structures as may be required. Consideration of re -naturalization, preservation of natural features, and reduction of visual impacts will be made during the various steps. In addition, all drainage facilities for on -site drainage will be designed following the same process. The objectives for the flood control and drainage facilities throughout the Travertine properties are: • Protect all buildings from damage from a 100-year storm in any of the drainage areas that cross or are within the property. • Safely discharge all flows leaving the property • Control sediment, and manage debris flow around the site. • Assure the reliable operation of each drainage feature through a full range of flows from low flows to the design event. • Where levees, channels, or embankments are used, provide adequate freeboard. • Assure that embankment, levee, and channel lining or stabilization is used to control scouring of channel inverts or side slopes. • Re -naturalize, landscape and or use "naturalized contour grading" where feasible and appropriate. 4.4.3 Grading Plan Grading of the project site will occur in two phases. Phase A will be the southerly half of the site, generally south of the Jefferson/Avenue 562 corridor to the edge of the preserved open space. Phase B will grade the balance of the site northward. Given the complexities associated with controlling alluvial fan flow and the sloping nature of the site, creative grading techniques will be necessary shown on Exhibit 4.9, Conceptual Grading Plan and Exhibit 4.10, Slope Ratio Diagram. The area planned to be graded is generally comprised of slopes of between 0% and 10%. The site is elevated, and grading will potentially be visible to areas north of the site. The grading will maintain the natural orientation and drainage of the land by implementing varied contoured grading at 2:1 to 5:1 ratio in conformance with natural terrain. The sections will demonstrate day -lighted slopes to natural, where natural slopes meet the graded slopes, as well as relationships between typical pads, proposed surface improvements, channels, trails, proposed golf uses, grading, reservoir pads, etc. at 4-181Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 984 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN various locations throughout the project. Additionally, all areas adjacent to the General Plan designated open space areas shall comply with the requirements of Section 9.110.070 and 9.140.040 (Hillside Conservation Regulations) of the Municipal Code. All grading will be performed under the supervision of an Engineering Geologist to guarantee a stable site for the intended use. Landscaping and irrigation facilities will be required for all graded slopes greater than 5 feet in height or areas susceptible to erosion. Track mounted portable crushers will be used directly on site, to allow rock crushing to exact grading specification. Rock crushing on site will eliminate the need for exporting rock and importing good fill material while also avoiding traffic congestion, providing dust control, avoiding damage to roads and tracked mud. Future final maps will include detailed grading plans and supporting engineering designs and analyses for review and approval by the City of La Quinta. 4.5 Utilities Electric service to Travertine will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District (IID). An offsite 2.5-acre substation will be required for the Travertine development and may be constructed during the Grading Phase A stage. Currently there are ongoing discussions with local parcel owners, III) and developers, to identify the future offsite substation. All required off -site parcels required for the substation will be chosen to fit the requirements of IID and will be studied with metrics provided bythe utility. The location of the 2.5-acre site will be within a 2-miles of the project. The routing of the proposed service lines along the route to the site will be studied for visual impacts and aesthetics in addition to all other known impact metrics that IID will make available. Telephone service will be provided by Frontier or Spectrum. Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas to the project site. The applicant will comply with the requirements of all utilities. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines with voltage higher than 92kV are exempt from this requirement. Energy conservation is the effort made to reduce the consumption of energy by using less of an energy service. It can be achieved either by using energy more efficiently or by reducing the amount of service used. Conservation methods must extend across and overlap with many different types of energy services such as water, electricity, and petroleum products. Energy conservation is an increasingly critical factor in both existing and developing communities across the globe. Many energy conservation measures have been included within the design and land plan of the Travertine community. These range from a land plan that seeks to balance and minimize grading, the use of natural or natural -emulating terrain features (slopes and drainage features) to minimize man-made hardscape features, low water use landscape design, and an extensive system of riding and hiking trails. In addition to these design decisions, additional energy conservation programs exist and will continue to be developed and put into place by regulators at the local, state and federal levels. The on -going physical implementation of the plan will be regulated by additional conservation measures, such as greenhouse gas/emission controls on large scale construction machinery, Title 24 housing requirements, and the reduction and recycling of construction waste materials. The Travertine community will implement all additional regulatory conservation measures that become effective during the course of its development. 4-191Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 985 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.6 Public Facilities & Services 4.6.1 Solid Waste Services associated with the collection and disposal of solid waste generated within the Travertine community will be operated and administered by Burrtec per the contract with the City of La Quinta. Individual developments within Travertine will implement measures that will be consistent with City regulations designed to reduce solid wastes, including but not limited to AB 939. 4.6.2 Fire Protection Fire protection service is provided for the City of La Quinta and administered by the Riverside County Fire Department. Presently, the Fire Department occupies three fire stations within the City: Station No. 32 located on Avenue 52 west of Washington Street; Station No. 70 located at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54; and Station No. 93 located on Adams Street north of Miles Avenue. Currently there is an ongoing discussion with Riverside County Fire Department and the City, to locate and fund the new south La Quinta fire station. At such time the location of the future fire station is determined, the interested parties will join in a "fair share" program to fund its installment. Emergency medical paramedic services are currently provided to the City by American Medical Response, a private paramedic ambulance agency. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows will be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of development. In addition, the level of service required for Travertine will be aligned with the criteria for Category II - Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan as follows: • Fire station located within three miles • Receipt of full "first alarmed" assignment within 15 minutes 4-201Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 986 4.0 INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN 4.6.3 Police Protection Law enforcement services are provided to the project site by the City of La Quinta Police Department through a service contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The La Quinta Police Department will provide service to the project site from existing facilities located at City Hall in the City of La Quinta. The current service agreement between the City and the Sheriff's Department provides protection on a 24-hour basis, seven days per week. The Sheriff's Department utilizes seven patrol deputies which result in typical response times of five minutes throughout the City. 4.6.4 Community Services & Facilities A large public library is located on Calle Tampico and is operated by the Riverside County Library System to serve City of La Quinta residents and visitors. The City of La Quinta is served by two school districts: the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) and the Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD). The majority of the site is located within the CVUSD area. A small portion on the eastern side of the project site is within DSUSD boundaries. No school sites are proposed within the Travertine project site. 4.6.5 Recreation The recreation plan will include a network of trails, including both on -street and off-street trails, which will provide pedestrian opportunities for both residents and visitors (see Exhibit 2.2). A small parking and staging areas will be provided along Avenue 62 where it enters project site from the East. The trailhead is intended to facilitate use of the trails. The off-street trails will account for approximately 2 acres. The onsite and off-street trail system inside the gates provides users a system that connects the planning areas north and south of Jefferson Street. The applicant will meet the City Parks dedication requirements as set forth in Chapter 13.48, of t he Municipal Code and in compliance with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. Credit shall be granted for onsite parks against park fees. 4-211Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 987 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMINISTRATION This section of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment describes the mechanisms for implementing the Plan and is to be consulted whenever there is a question concerning the Plan implementation in relation to the subsequent actions that may be proposed within the Travertine Development area boundary. As the City of La Quinta is the public agency responsible for the administration of the Travertine Specific Plan Amendment, the tools and procedures described in this section are to be implemented consistent with all City rules, regulations and policies. 5.1 Procedures The entitlement procedures required for future development applications within the Travertine community shall be in conformance with those procedures established and set forth in the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, except as noted below. All development applications shall be reviewed by the City of La Quinta as to their consistency with the intent of this Specific Plan. 5.2 Financing Plan The infrastructure and public facilities improvements, as generally described in the Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing Plan, will be financed in various ways and may include, but not limited to those programs as outlined below: • Developer contribution with reimbursement agreements • Developer contribution with credits against fees The final financing arrangements, including participation agreements, if any, shall be determined prior to or concurrently with the recordation of the applicable Final Map and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of La Quinta as well as all affected agencies if necessary. 5.3 Maximum Allowable Development The Travertine Specific Plan permits a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units to be constructed within the Specific Plan area. If Planning Areas 1 and/or 11 are developed to include residential housing, the maximum number of permitted dwelling units in Travertine will remain at 1,200 units. Transfer of Dwelling Units No amendment to this Specific Plan shall be required to transfer dwelling units between planning areas, provided that the following development transfer conditions are met: A. Each residential Planning Area allowing residential land uses (i.e., Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential) is assigned a target number of dwelling units. B. The project master developer may increase or decrease dwelling unit counts in any residential planning area, with the concurrence of the City's Planning Division. The Design and Development Director shall have the authority to determine if the transfer is in substantial conformance with the provisions herein and in the Travertine Plan Statistical Table (Table 12), or if a Specific Plan Amendment is required. C. Dwelling units may be transferred into Planning Areas 1 and/or 11 subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. D. In no case shall dwelling units be transferred into planning areas designated as Open Space. E. A transfer of units may be approved up to a 20% increase above the otherwise permitted density range for that Planning Area, i.e., Low Density Residential 4.0 du/ac plus 20% or Medium Density Residential 8.0 du/ac plus 20%, as listed within the Statistical Table (Table 12). 5-11 TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 •:; 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5,4 Statistical Table The Travertine Statistical Table (Table 12) provides details regarding the permitted density range for the development of each residential planning area. The table identifies each residential area as either a Low Density or a Medium Density Residential District with a corresponding permitted density range. The table then lists a preliminary or targeted number of dwelling units for each area. Additionally, as detailed in Section 5.3 Maximum Allowable Development/Transfer of Dwelling units, Travertine Statistical Table also described the parameters of the maximum allowable transfer of units to each Planning Area, so long as the maximum number of 1,200 dwelling units is not exceeded. The master developer shall be responsible for maintaining an accurate and up-to-date Statistical Table that reflects the number and location (by Planning Area) of all approved dwelling units, whether by tentative map, conditional use permit or other actions. The schedule of approved units shall be complied with in a method and manner acceptable by the Planning Manager. Table 12 - Travertine Statistical Table PA Land Use Acres Permitted Density Range*** Target # of Units Density Range plus 20% 1 Resort/Spa* 38.3 2 Medium Density Residential 25.9 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 205 249 3 j Low Density Residential 29.4 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 85 141 4 Low Density Residential 9.6 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 27 46 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 31 78 6 Medium Density Residential 20.1 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 163 193 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 61 90 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 73 81 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 74 142 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 75 123 11 Resort / Golf ** 46.2 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 107 251 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 48 128 14 Low Density Residential 39.0 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 65 187 15 Low Density Residential 33.3 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 70 160 16 Low Density Residential 50.4 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 116 242 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 21 1 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Totals 855.4 1,200 * 100villa units within PA 1 are excluded from maximum permitted 1,200 dwelling units **potential units within the Resort/Golf Land Use designation will be residential dwellings consistent with Zoning Code and will be counted as partof the 1,200dwelling unit maximum 'the numberof proposed dwelling units within any Residential Planning Area mayexceed the Permitted Density Range by20%as long as the maximum numberof 1,200dwelling units is met 5-21Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 989 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5.5 Determination of Development Standards Within the Planning Areas designated as Low Density Residential, four product types may be constructed in conformity of Table 13 as determined by the lot area of an individual building site. Each Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit submitted shall include a table listing the lot area of each residential building site and identify the product type to be built upon that lot. The approval of the Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit will establish the product type for each lot. The Design and Development Director may approve a product type on a lot of otherwise substandard area upon the review of an exhibit demonstrating the relative setbacks and separations of the lot and all adjacent lots. If it is determined that the variation will be in general conformance with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan (Section 3), the Director shall approve the variation. The Director's approval may occur after the approval of the Tentative Tract Map and can be considered with a Modification by Applicant. Table 13: Development Standards for Low Density Residential Product Estate Luxury SFD Large SFD Mid SFD Minimum Lot Size 9,000 sq. ft. 7,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 5,500 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width, Detached' 70 feet 60 feet 55 feet 50 feet Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet 90 feet Minimum Cul-de-Sac 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet Lot Width Maximum Structure Height 2 22 feet 22 feet 28 feet 28 feet Maximum Stories 2 2 2 2 Minimum Front Yard 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Setback Minimum Garage Setback' 18 feet 18 feet 18 feet 18 feet Minimum Interior Side Yard Setbacks' 7.5 feet 7.5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setbacks' 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard 25 feet 20 feet 15 feet 5 feet Setback Maximum Lot Coverage 35% 35% 40% 45% 'The Design and Development Director can administratively approve modifications of the standards up to 15% to account for irregular lotting situations. Please refer to the City of La Quints Municipal Code Section 9.50.070 Irregular lots, for irregular lot specifications. 'Building height will be measured from finished building pad elevation. 'All setbacks are measured from the property line. Side -loaded garages may encroach up to 5 feet into the front yard setback. °Mechanical equipment shall be allowed within side yard setback area with a minimum three-foot clearance to the side property line. 'Perimeter Streets for the Travertine Specific Plan area are Loop Street East and West Jefferson Street Avenue 62 and the Madison EVA. 5-31Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 990 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION Within the Planning Areas designated as Medium Density Residential, two product types may be constructed in conformity of Table 14 as determined by the lot area of an individual building site. Each Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit submitted shall include a table listing the lot area of each residential building site and identify the product type to be built upon that lot. The approval of the Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit will establish the product type for each lot. The Director may approve a product type on a lot of otherwise substandard area upon the review of an exhibit demonstrating the relative setbacks and separations of the lot and all adjacent lots. If it is determined that the variation will be in general conformance with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan (Section 3), the Director shall approve the variation. The Director's approval may occur after the approval of the Tentative Tract Map with a Modification by Applicant. Table 14: Development Standards for Medium Density Residential Product Small Lot SFD Single Family Attached Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. 4,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width, Detached 1 45 feet 35 feet Minimum Lot Depth' 80 feet 70 feet Minimum Cul-de-Sac Lot Width 35 feet 35 feet Maximum Structure Height z 28 feet 28 feet Maximum Stories 2 2 Minimum Front Yard Setback 10 feet 15 feet Minimum Garage Setback' 18 feet 5 feet Rear Yard Setbacks 15 feet 10 feet Minimum Interior Side Yard Setbacks' S feet 7.5 feet Minimum Exterior ide Yard Setbacks 10 feet 10 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 55% 55% 'The Design and Development Director can administratively approve modifications of the standards up to 15% to account for irregular lotting situations. Please refer to the City of La Quints Municipal Code Section 9.50.070 Irregular lots, for irregular lot specifications. 2Building height will be measured from finished building pad elevation. 'All setbacks are measured from the property line. 'Mechanical equipment shall be allowed within side yard setback area with a minimum three-foot clearance to the side property line. 'Perimeter Streets for the Travertine Specific Plan area are Loop Street East and West, Jefferson Street and Avenue 62. 5-4 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 991 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5,6 Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing Plan The primary intent of the phasing of the Travertine development, as conceptually depicted in Exhibit 5.1 and Exhibit 5.2, is to ensure that complete and adequate public facilities and services are in place and available for the residents and visitors to the community. The project grading and construction will take place in three phases. Phases 1A and 1B will grade the southern half of the project, improve and extend Avenue 62 into the Specific Plan area, and provide an EVA to cross the CVWD ponds and Dike 4 to connect to Madison Street. The connection point of the EVA within the community will be subject to the review and approval of more specific tract -level design. Grading Phase 1B will grade an additional land area north of the central roadway spine increment that is sufficient to accommodate the construction of the first 600 units within the Specific Plan. Grading and construction within Phases 1A and 1B are identified separately because this area would be able to accommodate the maximum amount of unit construction that may occur until the second major point of connection (the extension of Jefferson Street from the north and into the community), is constructed and operable to serve the community. Following the completion of the grading in areas 1A and 113, grading activities for the remaining project area may continue into Grading Phase 2, and later Phase 3. However, unit construction within these two Phases is dependent upon the completion of the second access to Jefferson Street. As development in Travertine and the surrounding community continues, market conditions as well as infrastructure design and improvements may evolve and change, and may necessitate changes to the phasing program anticipated and described herein. Upon the review and confirmation by the City of La Quinta that any such changes meet the intent of the Specific Plan, adequately serve the needs of the community, and do not require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14 (CEQA Guidelines), section 15162, these revisions shall be permitted without an amendment to this Specific Plan and the Development Director may determine, consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162(b) and 15164, whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation. If the developer proposes to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval, phasing plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Division for review and approval by the City Engineer. The phasing plans are not approved until they are signed by the City Engineer. 5-51Pane TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 992 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION Table 15: Phasing Plan Summary PA Land Use Acres Target Units Villas PHASE 1 (1-A and 1-B) 5 LDR 16.2 31 7 LDR 18.7 61 8 LDR 16.9 73 9 MDR 14.8 74 10 LDR 25.6 75 11 Resort / Golf 46.2 12 LDR 51.7 107 13 LDR 26.7 48 14 LDR 39.0 65 15 LDR 33.3 70 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 Phase 1 Totals 628.6 604 4 6 16 LDR MDR LDR 9.6 20.1 50.4 27 163 116 Phase 2 Totals 80.1 306 PHASE 3 1 Resort / Spa 38.3 100 2 MDR 25.9 205 3 LDR 29.4 85 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 Phase 3 Totals 111.7 290 100 Build Out Total 820.4 1,200 Master Planned Roadways (35.0 ac.) are not included in the Grand Total. Master Planned Roadways are built throughout the project from south- east of the project site to the north-west 5-61Pane TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 993 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION Exhibit 5.1— Conceptual Grading and Construction Phasing ti S , 15:'IFlI,74jj fIN r L _ ' I A-EY.F V L•. ELA } PHASE 3 4 •r � n 5 + •y l5 urfiQ4'm fi1FlILT ,. 5-71Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 994 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5,7 Maintenance Plan The primary objective of the Maintenance Plan is to ensure that the Travertine community establishes and maintains the highest standards of quality with regard to the upkeep of improvements and facilities. Common landscape areas and/or recreational facilities within individual developments will be maintained by an assigned Homeowners Association governing that development. Landscaping within the private streets' rights -of -way is proposed to be maintained by the Master Property Owners Association (POA) and Home Owners Association (HOA). Entry monumentation, master common landscape areas, and other areas commonly owned shall be maintained by a POA to be established by the developer. Common landscape areas and/or recreational facilities within individual developments will be maintained by an assigned HOA governing that development. Landscaping within the private streets' rights -of -way is proposed to be maintained by the Master POA and HOA. Entry monumentation, master common landscape areas, and other areas commonly owned shall be maintained by a Master POA to be established by the developer. All resort facilities will be privately owned and maintained. The following matrix, Table 16, identifies the maintenance responsibilities for the Travertine development. Table 16: Maintenance Responsibilities Maintenance Responsibilities City Master Property Owners Association (POA) Home Owners Association (HOA) Private Major Entries X Public Streets within project boundaries X Public Streets outside project boundaries, within City jurisdiction (Median landscaping only) X Private Streets X X X Master Common Landscape X Golf Course X Recreational Facilities X X X Resort Complex X Common Landscape X Flood Control Facilities X 5-8 1 P a g e TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 995 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND ADMININSTRATION 5,$ Amendments The Design and Development Director shall have the authority to determine substantial conformance with the provisions of this Specific Plan when changes in unit counts within individual planning areas are less than or equal to 20% and consistent with the density exchange parameters described in Section 5.3. Specific Plan modifications initiated by the developer shall be submitted to the Planning Division in writing. Any changes shall be processed per the provisions contained in the Government Code Section 65453 and will be subject to the requirements of Section 9.240.010 (Specific Plan Review) of the Municipal Code. If the Director determines that the modification(s) is (are) minor (less than or equal to 20% change and consistent with the density exchange parameters described in Section 5.3 ), the Director may approve the modification(s) without further administrative review. Modifications are considered minor when the result in a less than or equal to 20% change and are consistent with the density exchange parameters described in Section 5.3. Other types of changes, including but not limited to architecture design changes found to be consistent with design guidelines, or changes in the landscape palette of less than 20% deviation may be approved by the Director. If the Director determines that the modification(s) may result in a significant change in the project, the modification(s) shall require an amendment to the Specific Plan and will be referred to the decision - making authority specified in the Municipal Code. 5-91Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 996 6.0 APPENDIX 6 APPENDIX 6.1 Consistency with City of La Quinta General Plan An assessment of the proposed Amendment's consistency with applicable General Plan goals, policies and programs is provided below. Land Use GOAL LU-1 Land use compatibility throughout the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides diverse and high -quality housing, tourist commercial, resort and spa, skills golf course with club facilities, and park and recreation opportunities that meet the needs of its residents and bring tourism to the City. The Travertine Specific Plan establishes and maintains connections between existing neighborhoods and the Specific Plan neighborhoods. GOAL LU-2 High quality design that complements and enhances the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides many high -quality design elements that will ensure the following: a wide array of residential housing; integrates recreational uses; provides tourist commercial uses, preserves open space, and protects scenic views. GOAL LU-3 Safe and identifiable neighborhoods that provide a sense of place. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan incorporates design guidelines that will ensure high quality architecture and landscaping. The residential enclaves will be cohesive in design and character and recreational facilities will be consistent with their surrounding neighborhood. The master -planned community of Travertine is designed to complement the surrounding development in the area, incorporating residential, tourist commercial, open space, and park areas into a cohesive plan complementary to uses in the vicinity of the project. This Specific Plan is designed such that compatible land uses, open space areas, landscaped manufactured slopes, and elevation changes serve as buffers between the planned Travertine community and surrounding open space land uses. GOAL LU-5 A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides a mix of housing types that include medium, and low -density housing types, designed with enhanced architecture and landscaping, and access to pedestrian walkways, providing a walkable community for the residents. Circulation GOAL CIR-2 A circulation system that promotes and enhances transit, alternative vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian systems. 6-11Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 997 6.0 APPENDIX Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan provides a master planned roadway system with a network of bicycle/pedestrian pathways designed to meet the needs of residents, safely and efficiently transport people and goods, and accommodate the projected residential growth within the community. Livable Community GOAL SC-1 A community that provides the best possible quality of life for all its residents. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan provides a master planned community that includes over 357 acres of open space (including natural, passive and active areas) which is served by a network of pedestrian, bike and hiking trails, will connect residents and visitors to amenities to meet both active and passive needs. Residents will also have two community parks as well as localized pocket parks within neighborhoods. Visitors and residents will have access to a golf academy, and resort/ spa facilities. Residences will be designed in conformance with high architectural standards. CEC Energy Efficient Standards (CBC Title 24) will be required for all residential and non-residential uses. Solar systems, both passive and active, will take advantage of the year-round abundant sunshine. Green Building technology will be promoted to improve resource efficiency in the residential and tourist serving commercial uses. Economic Development GOAL ED-1 A balanced and varied economic base which provides the City a fiscal stability to the City, and a broad range of goods and services to its residents and the region. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan includes tourist commercial uses that will accommodate and attract residents of the city and visitors, offer new employment opportunities, and contribute to a strong and diversified economic base. The project developer will pay its reasonable fair -share of impact fees and improvement costs to fund the infrastructure improvements and other public facilities necessary to service the planned development. GOAL ED-2 The continued growth of the tourism and Resort/Spa industries in the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan allows for resident and tourist commercial uses that complement and support one another and will help maintain a strong sales and property tax base. The tourist commercial components of the Specific Plan will promote transient occupancy tax, retail, restaurants, and other support uses in a pedestrian -friendly environment which will enhance the fiscal growth potential and real estate values of the City and the Travertine community. Parks, Recreation and Trails GOAL PR-1 A comprehensive system of parks and recreation facilities and services that meet the active and passive needs of all residents and visitors. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will provide many recreational opportunities, including: two community parks (totaling approximately 13 acres), 6 miles of walkable trails that circumnavigate the 6-21Panc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 998 6.0 APPENDIX community and an additional 5 miles of trails interior to the project providing for a walkable community for the residents. Residential development areas will also have additional localized pocket park areas within the neighborhoods. On -street bike lanes will make it convenient to ride around the project for exercise and local transportation. A Class II bikeway will be constructed on the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 as well as the Loop Streets for the use and enjoyment of La Quinta residents. These amenities will also provide access to the project's 55.9 acres of recreational open space, and 301 acres of natural open space (including the 152 acres of habitat preservation), as well as the resort/ spa and the golf academy. Housing GOAL H-1 Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City's existing and projected population. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan is designed to provide a range of housing types and densities at varying price points that will help meet the anticipated demand for housing within different economic segments of the City. GOAL H-5 Provide equal housing opportunities for all persons. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan developer will encourage the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and in the for -sale or rental housing. GOAL H-6 Provide a regulatory framework that facilitates and encourages energy and water conservation through sustainable site planning, project design, and green technologies and building materials. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan incorporates sustainable design strategies that promote energy and water conservation measures. The project is designed to control water runoff and avoid contamination of water resources. All HOA maintained landscaped areas will be designed in a water - efficient manner and drought tolerant plants will be used throughout the individual neighborhoods, the resort/spa and golf course. Title 24 compliance is required for all construction. Air Quality GOAL AQ-1 A reduction of air emissions generated within the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will expand routes for golf carts and neighborhood electric vehicles, and plan for accessing and recharging facilities at the resort/spa and the golf academy facility. The plan provides an extensive pedestrian and bicycle network of paths, approximately 11 miles of such trails in addition to the on -street bike lanes that will be provided, to allow safe and convenient access to recreational and community facilities. Proposed development air quality emissions and greenhouse gas emissions shall be analyzed under CEQA and adhere to the City's GHG Reduction Plan. All construction activities will minimize emission of all air quality pollutants, grading activities shall adhere to established fugitive dust criteria. The project will implement the air quality mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. 6-31Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 999 6.0 APPENDIX Energy and Mineral Resources GOAL EM-2 The conservation and thoughtful management of local mineral deposits to assure the long-term viability of limited resources. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will preserve any local mineral resources identified by the Department of Mines and Geology and to the greatest extent possible designate those undeveloped lands as Open Space. The project will implement mineral deposit resource mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR if necessary. Biological Resources GOAL B10-1 The protection and preservation of native and environmentally significant biological resources and their habitats. Consistency Analysis: The project has designated 152 acres of protected habitat area along the southern, western, and eastern boundaries of the site. This preserve area will protect known biological resources, including the important habitat for the Bighorn Sheep. The project will implement biological resource mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. The designated habitat area also includes areas of cultural resources to be protected. Cultural Resources GOAL CUL-1 The protection of significant archaeological, historic, and paleontological resources occur in the City. Consistency Analysis: The Travertine Specific Plan will preserve any significant archaeological and historic resources to the greatest extent possible. The project has been redesigned to preserve all nine cultural resources identified that are within or intersect the project. The project will implement mitigation measures as identified in the project EIR. Water Resources GOAL WR-1 Support the Coachella Valley Water District in its efforts to supply adequate domestic water to residents and businesses. Consistency Analysis: The project will utilize drought tolerant landscaping on all HOA maintained slopes and parkways. The resort/wellness center and the golf academy and its facilities will predominately use water wise landscaping and judicially reduce the use of turf in the golf skills course area. Open Space and Conservation GOAL OS-1 Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreation, environmental and economic purposes. 6-41Pagc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 1000 6.0 APPENDIX Consistency Analysis: The Travertine plan preserves 301 acres for habitat and natural preservation purposes. The vistas of the Santa Rosa Mountains, Coral Mountain and other scenic resources will not be disrupted. Noise GOAL N-1 A healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and Resort/Spa character. Consistency Analysis: The project complements the City's residential and Resort/Spa character. The project EIR addresses the potential impacts of noise associated with the proposed development. The Specific Plan will incorporate appropriate design measures and adhere to all applicable restrictions and requirements identified in the EIR to ensure that the potential impacts are mitigated to below a level of significance. Soils and Geology GOAL GEO-1 Protection of the residents' health and safety, and of their property, from geologic and seismic hazards. Consistency Analysis: The project EIR addresses the potential impacts of natural hazards associated with the proposed development. The Specific Plan will incorporate appropriate design measures and adhere to all applicable restrictions and requirements identified in the EIR to ensure that the potential impacts are mitigated to below a level of significance. Flooding and Hydrology GOAL FH-1 Protection of the health and safety, and welfare of the community from flooding and hydrological hazards. Consistency Analysis: The Specific Plan includes preservation and avoidance of the larger areas related to the identified Middle North and Middle South storm flows to address flooding concerns. Additionally, development has been sufficiently set back from the natural water courses to assure adequate protection of life, property, and habitat values. A reinforced flood protection barrier along the western and southern edge of development will provide flood protection for flows from the adjacent open space and directing the flows to downstream off -site areas along Dike No. 4 and the Guadalupe Dike thereby protecting the project from off -site flows. Hazardous Materials GOAL HAZ-1 Protection of residents from the potential impacts of hazardous and toxic materials. Consistency Analysis: Development of the project will be evaluated in the EIR and the project will implement all measures identified in the project EIR to protect the residents' safety from potential impacts from hazardous and toxic material. 6-51Panc TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 1001 6.0 APPENDIX Emergency Services GOAL ES-1 An effective and comprehensive response to all emergency service needs. Consistency Analysis: Fire protection and emergency response services to the Specific Plan Area will be provided by the City and County. The service levels of fire and police protection needed to adequately serve the Travertine community will be identified and addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. Although Madison Street, south of Avenue 60, would be removed as a public right of way, it will be improved as an emergency vehicle accessway (EVA) for access into the Travertine community. During the phased construction of the community, interim solutions have been identified and will be implemented to ensure required access for fire and emergency services will be available at all times. Water Sewer & Other Utilities GOAL UTL-1 Domestic water facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and long-term needs of the City. Consistency Analysis: The domestic water needs will be provided by Coachella Valley Water District. The water assessment analysis for the Travertine community will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. GOAL UTL-2 Sanitary sewer facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and long-term needs of the City. Consistency Analysis: The sewer needs and facilities will be provided by Coachella Valley Water District. The sewer services assessment analysis for the Travertine community will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report being prepared in conjunction with this Specific Plan. 6-61Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 1002 6.0 APPENDIX 62 Reference Table and Exhibit 1. Table 12 - Travertine Statistical Table PA Land Use Acres Permitted Density Range *** Target # of Units Density Range plus 20% 1 Resort/Spa* 38.3 2 Medium Density Residential 25.9 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 205 249 3 Low Density Residential 29.4 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 85 141 4 Low Density Residential 9.6 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 27 46 5 Low Density Residential 16.2 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 31 78 6 Medium Density Residential 20.1 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 163 193 7 Low Density Residential 18.7 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 61 90 8 Low Density Residential 16.9 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 73 81 9 Medium Density Residential 14.8 4.0 - 8.0 du/ac 74 142 10 Low Density Residential 25.6 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 75 123 11 Resort / Golf ** 46.2 12 Low Density Residential 52.2 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 107 251 13 Low Density Residential 26.7 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 48 128 14 Low Density Residential 39.0 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 65 187 15 Low Density Residential 33.3 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 70 160 16 Low Density Residential 50.4 2.0 - 4.0 du/ac 116 242 17 Open Space Recreation 18.1 18 Open Space Recreation 14.7 19 Open Space Recreation 23.1 20 Open Space Natural 301.2 21 Master Planned Roadways 35.0 Totals 855.4 11200 * 100 villa units within PA 1 are excluded from maximum permitted 1,200 dwelling units ** potential units within the Resort/Golf Land Use designation will be townhome and/or multifamily dwellings consistent with Zoning Code and will be counted as part of the 1,200 dwelling unit maximum *** the number of proposed dwelling units within any Residential Planning Area may exceed the Permitted Density Range by 20% as long as the maximum number of 1,200 dwelling units is met 6-71Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 1003 6.0 APPENDIX 2 - Exhibit 2.1 Travertine Land Use Plan r CANS Cord . WUL31ai13 o4 4 � tl'7Grii:F7�FFi�FRS�.V WI NiK ,moa!►r�l n vF Ob! 11+4 tqq�II .V6W 2SOAG Ma W5 ]��a�e iaK M LI _14� t4W CY: �{IN AY� I`pl 1M FARK E{SF �44P$fiRE€7 � .a r+c mow. noc „+uex lirw "T 4VEAKA-�2 Ulm GL1A W ES T nw au+e na br al ier sr x w rw Rock sfido N LEGEND 0 4om Nosily Reedtl nhel - 31 A Ac 0 umn Space + rowool-am"- S69 At MF64m Nnalp somden4s1- dO t Ac � ripen 5paae a ualo al . A' 3 Ac 065.4 A. R..A.Q1rCLG.&1ik Wan PlannedAwhu fs.35.4Aa 6-81Page TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT - 2023 1004 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT F 0) X w Q z H 0 z Ln 0 i z z w i z Q J i Q i 0 0 0 m un 0 6 CU z L3 3 d i 0 0j d 0 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM EASEMENTS AND PARCELS (SEE SHEETS M-03 & M-04 FOR EASEMENT NOTES) EXISTING AFFECTED EASEMENT PARCELS NUMBER 1 1 - 7 2 8 - 11, 13 3 8, 9, 11 4 1, 5, 6, 8 - 12 5 9 6 8 7 8 3 9 7 10 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 11 12 12 4, 6, 7, 14 13 (INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 14 17 15 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 16 10 17 1 - 7 18 13, 14, 16, 17 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 19 17 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 20 15, 17 21 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 22 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 23 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 24 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 25 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 26 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 27 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 28 (LOCATION CANNOT BE DETERMINED) 29 19 VICINITY MAP PGA WEST a J x U Y Q J AVENUE 58 W � 9F 9�F Cr �2 AVENUE 60 o�F W N z NAP 20 z o Q TRILOGY LA QUINTA o 0 � O U M AVENUE 62 s N TS PROJECT SITE z 0 U 0 AVENUE 64 RIVERSIDE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 753-040-014, 753-040-016, 753-040-017, 753-050-007, 753-050-029, 753-060-003, 764-280-057, 764-280-059, 764-028-061, 766-110-003, 766-110-004, 766-110-007, 766-110-009, 766-120-001, 766-120-002, 766-120-003, 766-120-006, 766-120-015, 766-120-016, 766-120-018, 766-120-021, 766-120-023 SHEET INDEX: PROJECT INDEX SHEET 1 01 TENTATIVE MAP SHEET: TITLE SHEET M 01 SECTION SHEET M 02 DETAIL SHEET M 03 DETAIL SHEET M 04 DETAIL SHEET M 05 DETAIL SHEET M 06 DETAIL SHEET M 07 DETAIL SHEET M 08 DETAIL SHEET M 09 DETAIL SHEET M 10 DETAIL SHEET M 11 DETAIL SHEET M 12 DETAIL SHEET M 13 DETAIL SHEET M 14 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-026 AMENDMENT NO. 1 LAND USE: EXISTING: VACANT PROPOSED: COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL, GOLF COURSE AND OPEN SPACE GENERAL PLAN: EXISTING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE - RECREATION OPEN SPACE - NATURAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL MASTER PLANNED ROADWAYS PROPOSED: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE - RECREATION OPEN SPACE - NATURAL MASTER PLANNED ROADWAYS ZONING: EXISTING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLANNED ROADWAYS PROPOSED: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE MASTER PLANNED ROADWAYS AREA: GROSS AREA: 37,261,904 SF/ 855.4 AC LIMITS OF GRADING: 22,826,008 SF/ 524.0 AC PARCEL 13: (APN: 753-040-016) THENCE NORTH 00'14'08" WEST 30.00 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF MADISON STREET, ALSO BEING THE THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 34 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 00014'08" WEST 1953.83 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO A POINT ON THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 053692; EXCEPTING THEREFROM 1/2 OF ALL MINERAL RIGHTS BY DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 12, 1984 AS THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 89'48'15" EAST 98.67 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE; INSTRUMENT NO. 84-265643 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 14: (APN'S: 766-120-006 AND 766-120-016) THENCE SOUTH 01'34'58" WEST 156.30 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'29'17" WEST 362.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE SOUTH HALF 01'36'06" WEST 205.42 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00256'31" EAST 180.24 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00004'19" EAST OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, 631.61 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01'10'49" WEST 168.30 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 03'03'00" EAST 25.26 FEET; TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES THENCE SOUTH 00'46'14" WEST 176.88 FEET; PARCEL 3A: GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. THENCE SOUTH 27'28'20" EAST 54.03 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF AVENUE 62 A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND UPON EACH OF THE TWO STRIPS OF REAL PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT AND USE FOR ALL EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, PER DOCUMENT COUNTY; PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OF A ROAD AND OF WATER AND ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION PIPES, LINES RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 2008 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0597136, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AND ALL EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES, AND OTHER UTILITIES; LEGAL DESCRIPTION FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ORDER NUMBER: NHSC-6717950 DATE: JANUARY 11, 2022 PARCEL 1: (APN'S: 766-110-003 AND 766-120-001) THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE THEREOF, 1452.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID WESTERLY LINE, 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES, 1452.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33, THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 BEARS NORTH 00 DEG 01' 00" WEST, 920.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG 26' 27" EAST 300 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEG 01' 00" EAST 400.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 29' 45" WEST 300.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1 /4; THENCE NORTH 00 DEG 01' 00" WEST 400.00 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING NORTHERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33, DISTANT THEREON SOUTH 0 DEG 01' 00" EAST, 1320.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG 29' 45" EAST, 300.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION 33; PARCEL 2: (APN: 766-110-004) THE NORTH 3/5 OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTH 3/5 BEING PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; EXCEPT THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 3: (APN: 766-110-007) THENCE SOUTH 00'14'08" EAST 661.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 18: (APN: 764-280-057) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 10, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0113798, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH 89'48'23" EAST 101.24 FEET ALONG CENTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTER SECTION LINE SOUTH 00'12'45" WEST 10.19 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20'12'35" EAST 13.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'37'20" WEST 248.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01'19'43" EAST 90.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'09'35" WEST 228.86 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02'58'47" WEST 61.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01'34'58" WEST 8.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE AS DESCRIBED WITHIN SAID GRANT DEED; THENCE SOUTH 89'48'15" WEST 98.67 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF MADISON STREET, ALSO BEING THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH 00'14'08" WEST 661.28 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 19: (APN'S: 764-280-059 AND 764-280-061) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTIES AS DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEEDS RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 053692 AND 053694, BOTH OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING THE WEST 3/5TH OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 3/5 BEING PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE PROSPECT FOR, MINE, AND REMOVE THE SAME, ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF CONGRESS OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; APPROVED JUNE 1, 1938 STAT. 609), AS RESERVED IN THE PATENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 18, 1992 AS COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; INSTRUMENT N0. 352836 OFFICIAL CIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY 100.00 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 400.00 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED HALF INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS AND HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NON-METALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON, OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID LANDS, WHICH INTEREST IS SO LIMITED, HOWEVER, THAT THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE NO RIGHT OF INGRESS, EGRESS OR REGRESS IN, OVER OR ACROSS, OR RIGHT TO DRILL, EXPLORE FOR, MINE OR REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS BY OPERATIONS ON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPLORE FOR, MINE AND REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY A DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY BY SLANT DRILLING, SHAFTS, TUNNELS, OR OTHER MEANS OR OPERATIONS ON OR FROM LAND OTHER THAN SAID LAND. SAID STRIPS OF REAL PROPERTY ARE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE WESTERLY 30.00 FEET AND THE SOUTHERLY 30.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY 30.00 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 4: (APN: 766-110-009) THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED HALF INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS AND HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NON-METALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON, OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID LANDS, WHICH INTEREST IS SO LIMITED, HOWEVER, THAT THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE NO RIGHT OF INGRESS, EGRESS OR REGRESS IN, OVER OR ACROSS, OR RIGHT TO DRILL, EXPLORE FOR, MINE OR REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS BY OPERATIONS ON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPLORE FOR, MINE AND REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY A DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY BY SLANT DRILLING, SHAFTS, TUNNELS, OR OTHER MEANS OR OPERATIONS ON OR FROM LAND OTHER THAN SAID LAND. PARCEL 5: (APN: 766-120-002) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 15: (APN: 766-120-018) BEING A PORTION OF PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 3 OF QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 2, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0152345, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL "A" COMMENCING AT THE CENTER -SOUTH ONE SIXTEEN CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTH 89'46'28" EAST 880.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89'46'28" EAST 121.48 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 00*1l'01" EAST 660.95 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 SOUTH LINE SOUTH 89'47'10" WEST 121.48 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 00'11'01" WEST 660.92 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 16: (APN: 766-120-021) BEING A PORTION OF PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 12, 2008 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0121018, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL "A" COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT REAL PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; 2008-0121018, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EAST SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE THEREOF, 1452.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID WESTERLY LINE, 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89'47'10" WEST 129.91 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE THENCE SOUTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES, 1452.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 6: (APN: 766-120-003) THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WESTERLY 300 FEET THEREOF; PARCEL 9: (APN: 753-040-017) THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 89'47'10" WEST 129.91 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 00'14'08" WEST 661.25 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; PARCEL 10: (APN: 753-040-014) THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THENCE NORTH 89'46'28" EAST 129.92 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. PARCEL 11: (APN: 753-050-029) THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. PARCEL 12: (APN: 753-060-003) ALL OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 50' 58" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 4 A DISTANCE OF 2644.21 FEET TO THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 49' 39" EAST CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF SECTION 4 A DISTANCE OF 1091.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 DEG 08' 54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 301.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 26 DEG 40' 44" WEST A DISTANCE OF 583.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18 DEG 03' 05" WEST A DISTANCE OF 913.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62 DEG 19' 09" WEST A DISTANCE OF 523.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55 DEG 53' 25" WEST A DISTANCE OF 545.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86 DEG 15' 16" WEST A DISTANCE OF 668.56 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEG 18' 58" WEST A DISTANCE OF 248.98 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47 DEG 47' 20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 285.54 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37 DEG 17' 03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 352.51 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 55' 17" WEST A DISTANCE OF 268.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73 DEG 28' 11" WEST A DISTANCE OF 330.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44 DEG 46' 57" WEST A DISTANCE OF 235.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28' 57' 52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 399.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13 DEG 40' 56" WEST A DISTANCE OF 38.51 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEG 55' 20" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 999.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 89'47'10" WEST 224.62 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 802.00 FEET, A LINE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE AT SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 38'23'25" WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 360.07 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25'43'25", A LINE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE AT SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 64'06'50" EAST; THENCE SOUTH 00'14'08" EAST 277.63 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 17: (APN: 766-120-023) PARCEL 7: (APN: 766-120-015) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 2, 2006 AS THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE WEST 880 FEET OF THE INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0152345, AS PARCEL 5, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 8: (APN: 753-050-007) THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. ALSO EXCEPTING AN UNDIVIDED THREE -SIXTHS (3/6) INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NONMETALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTH 00'14'08" WEST 661.28 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PROPERTY, ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89'47'50" WEST 101.67 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. APPLICANT/DEVELOPER HOFMANN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. P.O. BOX 907 CONCORD, CA 94522 (925) 478-2000 ENGINEER/SURVEYOR PROACTIVE ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 27042 TOWNE CENTRE DRIVE, SUITE 110 FOOTHILL RANCH, CA 92610 TEL:(949) 716-7460 CONTACT: MARK ANDERSON, PE REVISIONS PREPARED BY: PRC>ACTIVE ENGINEERING EERI ONSULTAi T 7042 Towne Cenlrie� Drive, Suite 110 Foothill Ranch. rA 9 610 (949) 716-746-D I IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF I RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PROJECT INDEX SHEET A PORTION OF S 33, T6S, R7E & A PORTION OF S 4 AND S 5, T7S, R7E, SBM SHEET NO. 1 01 0C c z a a a z C" c N THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT PM�� 617 PMB 2 1 80-83 \APN: 766-020-008 \ INDIO 40 INVESTMENT MAP NO, 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SERVICES SEWER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT PHONE: (760) 398-2651 WATER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT PHONE: (760) 398-2651 GAS: THE GAS COMPANY PHONE: (909) 335-7706 ELECTRIC: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT PHONE: (760) 398-5841 TELEPHONE: FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS PHONE: (760) 778-3620 CABLE TV: SPECTRUM PHONE: (760) 340-2225 USA: UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT PHONE: (800) 227-2600 SCHOOL: COACHELLA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT PHONE: (760) 416-6000 DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT PHONE: (760) 777-4200 GENERAL NOTES 1. SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND WATER SUPPLY WILL BE PROVIDED BY COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT TR 32201 APN: 766-080-003 66-080-007 MB 405129- 55'-� \ USA \ APN: 0 APN: 766-080-005 AVENUE 60 66-U 06 LO WAVE LISA CASTRO j — 55', � - DEVELOPMENT LLC T APN 766-110-010 55' SHEET T " \ APN: \ GUILLERMO RAUL o I I \ 766-100-003 APN: 766-110-018 \ �I CASILLAS M USA o USA APN. LV �\ \ W APN: 766-110-017 766-180-011 TO 4 o �, APN: 766-110-002 g TRAVERTINE CORP USA 766-170-015 SUBDIVISION C \ ANS \ \ Z \BEET 31-EET M-03 — APN: 766-110-006 APN: 766-110-012 \ \ Q \ l APN: 766-110-018 WILLARD KELSEY APN: 766-110-011 CVWD ISHEET M-i0 USA CVWD \ SHEET M-04 \ —�-- — io � TR 30023-1 SHEET M-13 SHEET M-11 SHEET M-05 / IAPN: 766-110-008 APN: 766-110-014 30 APN: 766-110-004 APN: 766-110-007 WILLARD KELSEY \ 30, MB 329/87-102 TRAVERTINE CORP TRAVERTINE CORP I I APN. 766-110-013 CVWD \ \ CVWD II �I � \ \ SHEA LA QUINTA APN: 766-110-009 � APN: 766-110-017 \ TRAVERTINE CORP USA \ o \ SHEET M-12 SHEET M-06 \ \ SHEET M-14 APN 766-110-005 I APN, 766-110-015 V APN: 766-100-003 USA 2. FEMA FLOOD ZONE- ZONE "D" (AREAS IN WHICH FLOOD COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE HAZARDS ARE UNDETERMINED, BUT POSSIBLE) 3. CITY OF LA QUINTA BENCHMARK NO. 770 - 3.5" BRASS CITY OF LA OUINTA DISK IN TOP OF CURB, FLUSH, LOCATED SOUTH EAST Y OF INTERSECTION OF MADISON STREET AND AVENUE 60. I I I o Y NAVD88 DATUM, ELEVATION:-30.897 z � Y o oQ ¢ 0 2 p W O W J I p I O 2 W O O O O 02�:51 I ��� W 2 ^ Z 8 Z O I zp� 1� ¢ I Z J ^�2z I SEC.5 T7SWE I , I � � Z W Cl APN: 753-050-028 EMILIO CARL MELILLO 0 0 LL 0 Z 0 U n O O O O W I I I ago a� Q �¢ APN: 753-050-029 TRAVERTINE CORP MARIA J ALLGOOD CVWD APN: 766-280-058 CVWD M- NAP C� APN: 766 80-057 Q SHEET, T6S, R7E, SB L— TRAVERTINE CORP --\A— — APN: 766-120-004 APN: 766-120-005 I \ CVWD CVWD APN: 766-120-011 \ TR 35996 3165-69 SHEET INDEX I USA \ \SHEA MB 3LA QUINTA \ APN: 766-120-007 APN: 766-120-009 o I \ \ CVWD CVWD of z \ oo cl Lo \ APN: 766-120-006 \ TRAVERTINE CORP APN: 766- Q I \ o \ z t2o-o17 \ \ CVWD Vc \ APN: 766-120-016 APN: 766-120-003 I TRAVERTINE CORP TRAVERTINE CORP APN: \ I o \ N� o APN: 766-120-013 766-120-0 2 14i APN: 764-280 059 \ PN: 766-120-018 CVWD CVWD TRAVERTINE CORP �p M TRAVERTINE CORP W 1 fl 3W23-1 APN: 766-280-060 \ \ \ a ¢,- \ \ CVWD Z APN MB 329/87-102 \ APN: 766-120-021 RS 1311,87� o 764-280-006 APN \\ \\ TRAVERTINE CORP 764-280-028 .P RICHARD J MEYER/ \ I SUZANNE M MEYER TRIOLOGY AT II \ \ APN: 766-120-015 APN: 764-280-062 LA QUINTA APN APN TRAVERTINE CORP CVWD APN MAINTENANCE ASSN. 764-280-056 764-280-030 \ APN: 7\ 764-280 APN CVWD APN CVWD64-280-061 TRAVERTINE CORP I \ CBGM 764 ��� 054 764-280-054 AVENU \62 753-070-017----""o \ r / _ 753-070-018 I 753-070-027 753-070-031 753-070-028 � / \ APN: 7USA 70-010 1 I I I \ I \ \ APN: 753-070-011 z I I I 1 � USA Q I I I I O I I I I I APN: 753-070-003 ` ^ I I I / NORMAN LOFTHUS I I T7S, WE, SBM - a / APN: 753-070-004 APN: 733- of BGBE INV OZ..- 5 ^o APN: 753-060-003Irl TRAVERTINE CORP APN: 753- 070-005 APN: 753-070-016 \ TRAVERTINE USA Q CORP � � I w i LEGAL DESCRIPTION � � Q I I �+ > o I > APN: 753-050-007 z l N z I I o Z I TRAVERTINE CORP 30' -j O Ir 30 ^p� ZOO ZOO U= ZO-� aW_o rLWo z-"' aW_o Q J J Q J � g Q J U3IU� r,W = zs W I �' I N APN: 753-050-008 r o o W WI WILLARD KELSEY ^�� I o� I oho ado d,z Z5 500 250 0 500 1000 1500 I ¢ I I APN: 753-050-014 APN: 753-050-013 MARC AVRIETTE & , TRAVERTINE CORP LESLIE AVRIETTE SCALE: 1"=500' APN: 753-120-023 APN: 753-1 USA JAY JAMSH, MARYAM TE APN: 753-060-004 USA MARTINEZ ROCK SLIDE o CITY OF LA QUINTA i ?0/' COUNTY O * RIVERSIDE 75 JA 3 TR002 Q Q \ ` APN: 753-080-004 z I R \ APN: 753-080-001 APN: 53- 80-016 ESTATE OF BEATRICE \ SA� Q CRANE o \ \ J \ 0� 0 \ \� D \� \ U U APN: 753-080-005 \ TRAVERTINE APN: 753-080-002 CRISTINA PETERSON & \ TIMOTHY BOPP \ \ 30APN: 753 ' 080-012 30' \MARIA J ALLGOOD\�,I_ cn APN: 753-080-003 I APN: 753-080-006 - AVENUE 64 TRAVERTINE CORP �— TRAVERTINE - APN: 753-130-005 APN: 753-130-007 APN: 753-130-009 APN: 753-130-003 USA USA USA T---USA APN: 753-080-008 APN: 753-080-009 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE PROJECT INDEX SHEET FOR COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION. r- 00 0 z a Q U a a z Li I N N Cl N N c v 1006 m 3 w w I CD I Ln 0 z w / z Q w w ra 0 0 0 in 0 0 R.J / Z L7 d 0 m I CU oj CD (U cu d 0 0 N THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA R/W I R/W TENTATIVE TRACT 84' 15' 812' 14' 12' 8' 15' MAP NO, 37387 2' PARKWAY BIKE LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE BIKE LANE PARKWAY 2' 6' S-9' 3'-9' 6' PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 MEANDERING MEANDERING SIDEWALK SIDEWALK AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM �qR .7 s 2q 2 4 4 2 2% 2% R - imill L i i-i i t ii-iii=iii: VAR 2' 1, STRIPED MEDIAN (0-600 UNITS) RAISED MEDIAN (601+ UNITS) JEFFERSON STREET (PUBLIC) N.T.S. R/W R/W STATION: 10+00-140+50 60 EX. EX. 20' 20' S'LY N'LY R/W � R/W R/W PROP. VARIES 4' 6' 8' 12' 12' 8' 6' 4' VARIES 60' SLOPE & DRAINAGE I SIDEWALK BIKE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE BIKE SIDEWALK I SLOPE & DRAINAGE 10' EASEMENT LANE LANE EASEMENT 30' 30' I RIVERSIDE COUNTY 3' CITY OF LA QUINTA K-RAIL 2 1 1 2 K-RAIL 2% 2% SLOPE EASEMENT 13' 8' 12' 6' 12' 8' 6' 5' SLOPE EASEMENT BIKE LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE BIKE LANE SIDEWALK I HEADWALL 15' PARKWAY/PUE VAR( 6' 9' 8' 2' SIDEWALK LANDSCAPE BIKE MINI LANE 2% HEADWALL 1-111 - IN11 L _ _'- 2 4 STRIPED MEDIAN (0-600 UNITS) -111� 11=I I I� I I -III_ PREFABRICATED CONCRETE ARCH A AVENUE 62 (PUBLIC) EXISTING FINISHED GRADE N.T.S. / STATION: 140+50-152+00 GUADALUPE CROSSING EX. N.T.S. S'LY R/W 1 80' 70' 40' 20' 20' 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 2% STREET "D", "Ga (PRIVATE) N.T.S. 15' PARKWAY/PUE 8' 9' 6' IVAR BIKE LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK 2' LANE (MIN 2% EX. WILY R/W RIVERSIDE COUNTY I CITY OF LA QUINTA I I 2' 10' 1, 8' 12' 6' 12' 8' 6' 4' 10' BIKE LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE BIKE LANE SIDEWALK 1 x FENCE 1 2 2% _ -- 2% 2% FENCE 5 2 �T.IDIIIWIMAII RETAINING WALL EXISTING GRADE H VARIES 4' TO 35't B AVENUE 62 (PUBLIC) N.T.S. STATION: 152+50-160+00 RETAINING WALL H VARIES 4' TO 35't EX. R/W 50' R/W R/W S'LY R/W 80' 2' 5' 5' 20' 20' 5' 5' 2' 11' 19' 27' PUE (SIDEWALK SIDEWALK( PUE RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITY OF LA QUINTA I � I I 1 �qX MPS EXISTING GRADE 9' 2' 8' 12' 6 12' 8' �P 2% 2% 2% 2% MqX BIKE LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE BIKE LANE SECTION NOTES STREET "A", "B", "C", "E", "P. "H", ala, 'in (PRIVATE) N.T.S. 94' FMFR(,FN('Y VFHI('1 F A('('FCS 2' 2'7 Mq,K 2' D:1 MADISON EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS N.A.P. ACCESS ROAD SECTION 5 ACCESS ROAD N.T.S. Q1 MINIMUM 4" A.C. ON 6" CLASS II AGGREGATE BASE. 2Q 8" CURB AND GUTTER PER CITY OF LA QUINTA STD. DWG. NO. 202 Q3 6' SIDEWALK PER CITY OF LA QUINTA STD. DWG. NO. 240. 4 6" MEDIAN CURB CITY OF LA QUINTA STD. DWG. NO. 210. 05 6' MEANDERING SIDEWALK PER CITY OF LA QUINTA STD. DWG. NO. 245. © 6" CURB AND GUTTER PER CITY OF LA QUINTA STD. DWG. NO. 201 0 STRIPED MEDIAN J EX 24' PAVEMENT �I C AVENUE 62 (PUBLIC) N.T.S. STATION: 160+00-191 +41 EXISTING GRADE 23' 3'-15' 6' 2' MEANDERING SIDEWALK r EX. N'LY R/W EXISTING GRADE 1 MPy,. I EXISTING BLOCK WALL 44A - LOT DESIGNATIONS AND AREA: 1 3.75 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AA" 5.19 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 2 4.98 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "BB" 1.60 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 3 14.32 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "BC" 0.07 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 4 12.96 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "CC" 1.24 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 5 24.69 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "CD" 0.92 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 6 15.66 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 7 7.56 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "DD" 0.60 AC -OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 8 6.09 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "EE" 1.68 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 9 16.92 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "FF" 11.25 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 10 13.79 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "GG" 9.11 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 11 21.37 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "HH" 16.20 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 12 12.70 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "II" 2.23 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 13 30.37 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "JJ" 1.68 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 14 2.47 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "KK" 0.90 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 15 4.57 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "LL" 0.76 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 16 29.73 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 17 2.24 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "MM" 1.76 AC -OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 18 4.08 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "NN" 1.58 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 19 1.71 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "00" 3.59 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 20 9.74 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "PP" 1.36 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 21 10.72 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "QQ" 4.33 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 22 7.28 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "RR" 1.99 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 23 1.53 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "SS" 2.82 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 24 3.55 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "TT" 6.11 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE TRAIL 25 2.30 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "UU" 1.13 AC -OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 26 3.54 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 27 2.83 AC - FUTURE PARK/OPEN SPACE LOT "W" 2.87 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 28 1.34 AC - FUTURE PARK/OPEN SPACE LOT "WW" 0.07 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 29 1.94 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "XX" 1.57 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 30 1.48 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "W" 3.19 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 31 8.70 AC -FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "ZZ" 2.26 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 32 6.90 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AB" 0.88 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 33 3.74 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AC" 2.83 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE/TRAIL 34 8.39 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AD" 1.23 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 35 1.13 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AE" 7.35 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 36 1.65 AC - FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOT "AF" 2.71 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 37 8.58 AC - ACCESS/WATER FACILITIES LOT "AG" 1.71 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 38 0.32 AC - FUTURE BOOSTER STATION LOT "AH" 3.46 AC -OPEN SPACE/SLOPE 17.12 AC - PUBLIC STREET LOT "Al" 4.71 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "B" 9.62 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AJ" 2.18 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "C" 5.70 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AK" 3.68 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "D" 4.31 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AL" 1.62 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "E" 2.34 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AM" 7.11 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "F" 0.70 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AN" 0.85 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "G" 1.48 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AP" 2.59 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "H" 3.00 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AT 0.23 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "1" 0.84 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AR" 3.91 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "J" 4.20 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "AS" 4.01 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/UTILITIES LOT "K" 18.37 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION LOT "AT" 3.37 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/UTILITIES LOT "L" 20.69 AC - OPEN SPACE/BASIN LOT "AU" 6.27 AC - OPEN SPACE/BASIN LOT "M" 113.06 AC - OPEN SPACE LOT "AV" 1.56 AC - OPEN SPACE LOT "N" 22.64 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION LOT "AW" 0.14 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "0" 50.88 AC - OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED LOT "AX" 0.31 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "P" 56.00 AC - OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED LOT "AY" 0.46 AC - OPEN SPACE/SLOPE LOT "Q" 36.99 AC - OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED LOT "R" 5.56 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION NUMBER OF COMMON AREA, OPEN SPACE, AND NON -BUILDABLE LOT "S" 3.11 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION LOTS: 73 LOT "T" 5.53 AC - OPEN SPACE/RECREATION NUMBER OF BUILDABLE LOTS: 38 LOT "U" 0.53 AC - PRIVATE STREET LOT "V" 0.22 AC - PRIVATE WALK LOT "W" 6.49 AC - OPEN SPACE R/W 180' R/W 25' 20' 90' RAISED MEDIAN 20' 25' 6 PARKWAY 8' 12' 45' 45' 12' 8' PARKWAY 6 SIDEWALK VARIES BIKE LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE BIKE LANE VARIES SIDEWALK 2% I I 1 - 2% ROUNDABOUT _ N.T.S. m W I in 0 / z / z w / z Q J !L J ra / 0 0 0 in 0 0 OU Z 3 d M In I CU oj O CU cu c- d N O 'Il rn 1,00 N M CO t0 APN: 766-110-015 CVWD O Lo o O z 30' L- PARCEL 7A II II II II It a III J w II Q N LOT *JJ' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 1.68 AC II II I APN: 766-120-004 CVWD _co II I n� O t� N89'45'47"E --62.01'� U n W • cfl W I� cj)� LOT 'LL (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 0.76 AC I 11 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 21.37 AC APN: 766-120-004 CVWD N89'45'47"E 662.01' LOT Wr (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/UTILITIES) 2 1R. 00 N APN: 766-110-015 CVWD I �c 'o IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM APN: 766-120-005 CVWD APN: 766-120-007 CVWD N89'46'07"E 339.40' LOT "AT7 (OPEN SPACE _ /SLOPE) 2�, - - 3.38 AC 8' PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL 1 R ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA APPROVAL I0 N I O M M 3 0 III O Z APN: 766-120-017 CVWD SEE SHEET M-04 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' APN: 766-110-017 USA 7 I` I 24' MADISON EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS ROAD \ IS89°44'47"W 101.24' I N00°12'45"E 10.19' � cq 00 N20'12'35"W 13.99' `V w N01°19'43"W 90.88' 18.59' EASEMENT FOR MADISON EMERGENCY I VEHICLE ACCESS ROAD NO2°58'47"E 61.50' I LOT "W" � (OPEN SPACE) 6.81 AC APN: 766-120-009 APN: 766-120-010 APN: 766-120-011 CVWD CVWD USA 0 N 0 0 z 00 06 N N w in 0 0 0 0 z 0 w 00 �n 0 z w EASEMENT NOTES FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ORDER NUMBER: NHSC-6717950 DATE: JANUARY 11, 2022 EXCEPTION/EXCLUSION NUMBER (#) PER CURRENT TITLE REPORT 1 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF ALBERT E. SCHWABACKER, JR., A ETHEL S. SOKOLOW AND (12) JOHN L. SCHABAKER RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1951 AS BOOK 1310, PAGE 289 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; AND A QUITCLAIM DEED MODIFYING SAID EASEMENT AND RIGHTS WAS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 12, 1956 IN BOOK 1969, PAGE 485 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (NOT PLOTTABLE) 2 A RESERVATION OF A STRIP OF LAND 200 FEET IN WIDTH, LYING EQUALLY ON EACH SIDE OF EACH MAIN TRACK, SIDE TRACK, SPUR, SWITCH AND (16) BRANCH LINE, AS THE SAME ARE NOW, OR MAY HEREAFTER BE CONSTRUCTED UPON, ACROSS OR ADJACENT TO THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY; ALSO A RESERVATION OF THE RIGHT TO USE WATER NATURALLY RISING UPON OR FLOWING ACROSS THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY FOR THE OPERATION AND REPAIR OF RAILROAD, AS SET OUT IN DEED FROM SOUTHERN PACIFIC LAND COMPANY, A CORPORATION, RECORDED MAY 21, 1958 IN BOOK 2274 PAGE 399, OFFICIAL RECORDS. (NOT PLOTTABLE) QAN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF FRED W. SNODGRASS AND ALICE C. SNODGRASS (17) FROM ROBERT Y. ALLEN, RECORDED MARCH 19, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1959-022788 AND DECEMBER 10, 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1971-0140921 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. QAN EASEMENT 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF SECTION LINES IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HIGHWAYS, AS EVIDENCED BY PETITION DATED (9) JANUARY 9, 1901 AND RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. Q5 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL (18) PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF F. HECHINGER AND DORIS HECHINGER, RECORDED AUGUST 5, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1959-067955 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 6 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL (19) PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF F. HECHINGER AND DORIS HECHINGER, RECORDED JULY 5, 1960 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1960-058923 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 7 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN (20A) FAVOR OF DESERT RANCH HOMES, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, RECORDED JULY 27, 1961 AS INSTRUMENT 1961-064366 AND 1961-064368, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 8 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF DESERT PROPERTY CONSULTANTS, RECORDED JULY 27, 1961 (21) AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1961-064372 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 9 AN EASEMENT FOR FLOOD AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RECORDED OCTOBER 22, 1965 AS (23) INSTRUMENT NO. 1965-0120832 AND RECORDED JANUARY 17, 1966 AS (55) INSTRUMENT NO. 5584, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RIGHTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS IN THE PATENT DO RECORDED DECEMBER 21, 1906 AS BOOK 3, PAGE 348, OFFICIAL (10) RECORDS. (NOT PLOTTABLE) 11 AN EASEMENT FOR MONITORING WELL ACCESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, RECORDED (26) JUNE 29, 1995 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1995-0209729 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 0 THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR RIGHT OF ENTRY AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION (62) EASEMENT" RECORDED SEPTEMBER 19, 2008 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0514551 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN FAVOR OF CVWD. 0 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK EASEMENTS, COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THE DEED FROM 4 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, A PUBLIC AGENCY OF THE STATE OF (39) CALIFORNIA, AS GRANTOR, TO TRAVERTINE CORPORATION, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, AS GRANTEE, RECORDED MARCH 26, 2009 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2009-0148257 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 0 RIGHTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS IN THE PATENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 18, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 352836, OFFICIAL (25) RECORDS. (NOT PLOTTABLE) (CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE SHEET M-04) LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY --- --- LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M -02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 00 r7 M 0 z n- LLJ U Q Q z w I N N O N N C 1008 11 1\ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) s� 21.37 AC \ \ LOT "AW" \ (OPEN SPACE \ s�� /SLOPE ) \ 0.14 AC \ 9 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ \ �� �5 \��i-�. 16.92 AC �g \ \ LOT "C" LOT 'WA \ / (OPEN SPACE 2 i % /SLOPE) 2.87 AC \ 31 W� = LOT AX /N '^ (OPEN SPACE a v, /SLOPE) W 0.31 AC I II I 10 ,< (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 0 0 13.79 AC ' ,� n° � 11 ' Ivy o 'n �110 If toil N / v Q_ 00 I LOT 'AM' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) \ \ 7.11 AC (PRIVATE STREET) 5.42 AC LOT "C" (PRIVATE STREET) 5.42 AC IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM 487 13 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 30.37 AC APN: 766-120-017 CVWD APN: 766-120-019 CVWD 70' 04 00' — — 444' ' 107' �,N 84 TO BE QUITCLAIMED 13 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 30.37 AC LOT "AN" I (OPEN SPACE o, /SLOPE) IN 0.85 AC II I II I' 63� AVENUE 62 LOT AN (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 0.85 AC LOT 7" (PRIVATE STREET) 0.70 AC APN: 766-120-013 CVWD 8' PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO THE CITY ' OF LA QUINTA APPROVAL N89'47 18"E 1293.10 1558' _ — 489' I \ 11.72' EASEMENT FOR MADISON EMERGENCY \ VEHICLE ACCESS ROAD \ \ SEE SHEET M- N N r2 � I 0 O z N89°46'34"E 129.92' 4 M 0 'a z I I APN. 766-120-022 \ I I CVWD )i I OT 11W 'AD moo. (OPEN SPACE) 6.49 AC / W 38 (FUTURE BOOSTER o�0 1 / /r��� STATION) v, / 4 0.32 AC Z Irn L0 T "AS" (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/UTILITIES) 4.01 AC CP o II II LOT "AU" (OPEN SPACE /BASIN) 12 6.27 AC TO BE QUITCLAIMED II (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) co 12.70 AC III LOT `AS "___­� (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/UTILITIES) 4.01 AC 53' I I I lb I I (PRIVATE STREET) �h 0.53 AC — o� 249' 80 172 ' - _ 89TO BE G� LOT "AP" RELOCATED _— ( OPEN SPACE 152 /SLOPE) 4 � _ 30' S03`03'00"E 25.26' 4 30' 03 N 0 C,w 0 r� 0 z 0 0 N N co ^v 0 10 1 N w coo 6, o 0 � N 0 0 0 0 Cn } a Q �o 00 0 2. EASEMENT NOTES FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ORDER NUMBER: NHSC-6717950 DATE: JANUARY 11, 2022 EXCEPTION/EXCLUSION NUMBER (#) PER CURRENT TITLE REPORT AAN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF F. HECHINGER AND DORIS HECHINGER, RECORDED JULY 27, (22) 1961 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 64388 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT FOR FLOODING, OVERFLOW, SUBMERGING AND INCIDENTAL Q (24) PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RECORDED MAY 20, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 53146 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 18 THE EFFECT OF AN EASEMENT 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF SECTION LINES (32) IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HIGHWAYS, AS EVIDENCED BY PETITION DATED JANUARY 9, 1901 AND RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 19 AN EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN THE (33) DOCUMENT RECORDED MAY 14, 1908 IN BOOK 263 OF DEEDS, PAGE 164. ® THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND EASEMENT(S) CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "CONTRACT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT" RECORDED JANUARY 17, (36) 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 5584 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 21 AN EASEMENT 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF SECTION LINES IN FAVOR OF (41) THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HIGHWAYS, AS EVIDENCED BY PETITION DATED JANUARY 9, 1901 AND RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 22 A RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED (42) STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 6, 1922 IN BOOK 8, PAGE 217 OF PATENTS. 23 AN EASEMENT FOR ANY IRRIGATION, DRAINAGE AND STORM -WATER (43) PROTECTION WORKS AND CANALS, LATERALS AND APPURTENANT WORKS AND STRUCTURES AS MAY BE NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT FOR DISTRICT PURPOSES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT RECORDED DECEMBER 27, 1944 IN BOOK 658, PAGE 175 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 24 AN EASEMENT FOR RIGHT OF WAY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF WATER AND (44) INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, RECORDED JUNE 25, 1956 IN BOOK 1932, PAGE 403 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 25 AN EASEMENT FOR RIGHT AND PRIVILEGE AND EASEMENT TO FLOOD, (45) OVERFLOW, SUBMERGE, AND SEEP SAID LAND AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RECORDED OCTOBER 21, 1965 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 120163 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 26 AN EASEMENT 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF SECTION LINES IN FAVOR OF (52) THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HIGHWAYS, AS EVIDENCED BY PETITION DATED JANUARY 9, 1901 AND RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 27 A RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED (53) STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 6, 1922 IN BOOK 8, PAGE 217 OF PATENTS. 28 AN EASEMENT FOR ANY IRRIGATION, DRAINAGE AND STORM —WATER (54) PROTECTION WORKS AND CANALS, LATERALS AND APPURTENANT WORKS AND STRUCTURES AS MAY BE NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT FOR DISTRICT PURPOSES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, RECORDED DECEMBER 27, 1944 IN BOOK 658, PAGE 175 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. ® AN EASEMENT FOR RIGHT AND PRIVILEGE TO FLOOD, OVERFLOW, (56) SUBMERGE, AND SEEP SAID LAND AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RECORDED APRIL 18, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 40072 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (64) THE LACK OF A RIGHT OF ACCESS TO AND FROM THE LAND. LEGEND "o — — BOUNDARY LINE o CENTERLINE \ I SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE S27°28'20"E 54.03' RIGHT OF WAY SOO* 12' 10"E 30.00' z=B00' L=97' , I N89'47'50"E 122. 4' — - - - - — LOTLINE 145 N89'47'50"E 2110' 15 EASEMENT R=558 L=91� — — 0� 2.59 AC / LOT "AV" �j1 1 g 7 (OPEN SPACE) 1.56 AC cp � 14 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �h \` 2.47 AC SEE SHEET M-05 �\ ? LOT "WW" ,:4 (OPEN SPACE) >, , 0.07 AC LOT "L" (OPEN SPACE/BASIN) 20.69 AC 100 50 0 100 PARCEL LINE EX R/W <==> LOT ACCESS W SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES I.LI cr L PREPARED BY: I O W �w WPROACTIVi u_, rI, li 0 Vn W E l If EER G CON NT 27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suimle 110 Foothill Ranch. CA 92014 (949) 716-7460 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 200, 1 300 A PORTION OF S 33 TFS R71F Rc A SCALE: 1"=100' co M 0 z Q U Q z Li I N N O N N C_ 0 1009 \ 89p• (PUBLIC Ep \ 17.12 AC \ \ \LOT 'AF' (OPEN SPACE \ /SLOPE) `sue 2.71 AC IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 7 FNTA7 IVF 7 RAr,.7 MAP NC) rl7flR7 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE SHEET M-04 14 ti (FUTURE �RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �� ► �,\ 13 �p-�, ����s.� LOT �WW� (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �\'��`�o ,�`� ��j , (OPEN 0.07AC SPACE) 30.37 AC 0 o i I � � 17 lool \ o_ zo \ / 16 � � � / / moo• s�'' ��� �525' 241 LOT'AM' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) (PUBLIC STREET) / M `o- 7.11 AC 17.12 AC / a s \ /LOT AF \ / (OPEN SPACE �� / `� 60 /SLOPE) �o ��' „\ LOT "L" / 2.71 A � ' (OPEN SPACE/BASIN) / 60� � � � -P 20.69 AC \ / �15 lol* SA =105�98 i RSON R _ � , 474 i i T=T / , - I � \ � R=1142 ' L=1402 � _ — 18 I N 132 — — 135' 142 \ I (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL N DEVELOPMENT) 4.08 AC I ' 60' .p s 151 LOT 'AL' ( OPEN SPACE �s• \ `�o�, /SLOPE ) 1.62 AC r � c� 1 19 16 C (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) DEVELOPMENT) N 29.73 AC W 1 1.71 AC N W N \ \\ s\ \ cl) m W "LOT 'D' ♦W♦^ (PRIVATE STREET) N v, 4.31 AC 17 1 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL' `NP DEVELOPMENT) 2.24 AC I I O � N 00 �Irn I M LOT 'AJ 394 � M LOT 'AL' ( OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) o I (OPEN SPACE / 2.17 AC /SLOPE) 1.62 AC 15� — 107� / 21 150' _ R=505' L=184' 241' R=475' L=173' _ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL 14� 105, �41 R=445' L=16 1071 AC 40A,DEVELOPMENT) LOT'AR' 2' LOT 'J' (PRIVATE STREET) 4.20 AC 8' PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL ALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA APPROVAL LOT 'M' - (OPEN SPACE) 111.45 AC I I GV m� 1 1 6. I � I I - I I I 15 `n (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 4.57 AC 2' 14" /Cb N�'� (OPEN SPACE \ "'E� 162 °A 164' .� ,,51� �2, 00 /SLOPE) 1830' -150' 0 105' 4 3.91 AC / R.180p 1=148 400 259 169' 5 / kp0 v 17' A �_145' ��0.�� � � 2 j 145' 262 R,3640, ' 55' OT "� 5173 Rp'L40�01' ,p1 401' LJ13605' PUBLIC ACCESS 7RAIL (PRIVATE STREET) 122 BALIGNMENT SUBJECT TO THE CITY 20 4.20 AC OF LA QUINTA APPROVAL (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 2gg 122 376' 9.74 AC 196' 224' 74' 32' 37172' 111' 62' 124' SEE SHEET M-06 J' M LOT 'AK' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 1 3.68 AC Lo LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY W --- --- LOTLINE ♦^�♦^ EASEMENT V, WPARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS — SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES W 0 z 0 IU o 0 o� u� 30' 30' z w J M C co M N N W J = J M Q W Au 0 0 b _ Lo z V) 06 N g 0 o adz 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' ON ti G a IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA rn L,J V) L5 3 d L0 N I N N 0 N N c d N O �7 2ss•,.. \ 240. \S9• 269• N 239, 284, W \ W 2SS, r= V, W tissso \ W S� SR3S , COACHELLA VALLEY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT \ CONSERVATION LINE \ \ bs, . V9 '\ TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM MARTIN= ROCK SLIDE AWN: 753-060-004 x USA x x O O Lo 0` 2 LOT "P" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 56.00 AC LOT "N" (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) 22.64 AC SEE SHEET M-05 LOT "M" (OPEN SPACE) 113.06 AC As9, SEE SHEET M-07 \ °s• 272' 173' yl� �6• h/ 156' rn �I LOT "0" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 50.88 AC 125� \ \ Z 51 Q LL 0 V (o 00 PM co N fo 0 0 0 z W 0 cr W cc U- O Z 0 0 ou O U O n m W W I► E2 A4 30' 4 � 30' f j z o18 I W O � m W 0 W 4 I �7 30' 4 � 30' 'o 0 26� _ 94• LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE <==> LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' 00 0 z d Q U a o' ui Z Li I N N Cl N N C v 1011 IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA m J I cl) Ln O Z Z W Z Q J !L J Q 0 0 0 Ln CD CD 0j / z 3 d 011 CU I CU CU 0 CU CU c- d N i-' i-' O '21 MARTINEZ ROCK SLIDE APN: 753-060-004 USA CITY OF LA QUINTA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AVENUE 64 APN: 753-130-003 USA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM LOT "P" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 56.00 AC APN: 753-130-005 USA SEE SHEET M-06 425' — — LOT "N" (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) 22.64 AC 272' 261' \�6g, COACHELLA VALLEY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION LINE LOT "0" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 50.88 AC O M I'7 N89'56'45"W 1540.15' APN: 753-130-007 USA LOT "0" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 50.88 AC 4 30' 4 � 30' io rn co N to o O 0 o z Z 5 0 Q J U- O m� u i W co W LL 0 1�: M 0 U LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY - - - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' 00 NO cl- 0 z Q U Q w Q z w I N N O N N C 1012 PM 28617 PMB 201180-83 APN: 766-020-008 INDIO 40 INVESTMENT cA ` �;A APN: 766-100-003 \ USA \ \ u JEFFERSON STREET ROADWAY — EASEMENT TO BE GRANTED BY THE BLM rn w V) L5 d 0� cu I N N 0 N N c d N O �7 W v, W LL 0 Z M 0 0 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM -4-- Z M 0 Q LL 0 APN: 766-110-001 RICWD MDER iU 30' OFF -SITE SLOPE EASEMENT APN: 766-110-002 7RAVER17NE CORP APN: 766-110-018 USA \ N89'39'14"E 1285.48' i APN: 766-080-003 USA OFF -SITE SLOPE EASEMENT LOT "H" \ 00 — R \ N / (PRIVATE STREET) 3.00 AC \ / LOT 'AA' /" ''' , \'�°�, R�3j�' \ ( OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) zp, 5.19 AC LOT 'BB' — — — — \ "' ( OPEN SPACE �9 208' \ Lo 0469' /SLOPE) 1.60 AC30. \ \ 6= / (PUBLIC STREET) OFF -SITE SLOPE \ 17.12 AC EASEMENTul o � Lq rN AVENUE 60 2 N i° �N2 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) N Z4.98 AC � r\ � LOT 'CC' \ \ (OPEN SPACEK (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) ` /SLOPE) S� 0)\ 1.24 AC d' s SEE SHEET M-09 APN: 766-110-018 USA A7 20' S 33, T6S, WE, SBM APN: 766-110-006 WILLARD KELSEY N89'39'14"E 389.91' p 0 LOT 'AA' M "' o O N O (OPEN SPACE 04 0 0 O I /SLOPE) o o z 5.19 AC Z N89-39'14"E 400.01' 20' 7 8 r 20' TO BE QUITCLAIMED OR co I M \ LOT X" \ \ (OPEN SPACE/RECREACTION) Z LOT 'DD' \ \ 18.37 AC (OPEN SPACE I /SLOPE) 0.60 AC ` A APN: 766-110-008 WILLARD KELSEY LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY - - - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' r- 00 r7 ui O z d Q U a a z Li I N N Cl N N C v 1013 APN: 766-100-003 US4 L5 P2 d Lf 05 I N N 0 (U N d N O A 6'. I LOT 'CC' I (OPEN SPACE 1.24 AC /, 110' �I rn Lq N r2 w N LOT 'EE' N (SLOPE) 1.68 AC z 0 00 N Lo w z N 04 N O 0 z 84' 30' 42' 42' OR im 00 W� 001 0 of 0 z IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE SHEET M-08 Ifir, \�j \s b: J I s s LOT 'BB' o�rTi s �� \ LOT 'AA' I APN.WIIl766 KELSEY 8 (OPEN SPACE 2 1 /SLOPE) (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 0.60 AC 8 20 (OPEN SPACE 1.60 AC 4.98 AC i /SLOPE) (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) =3� 5.19 AC 3.75 AC - - - N89'42'51 "E 526.59'- - I� _ �34'� ` LOT "H" - - STREET 'J' , 486' R50' -2`'105 �� (PRIVATE STREET) 9 �� pp, 3.00 AC co ) R=280' - 7 8 I 20' N89'39'14"E 1016.71' LOT K - - - - N o� \ o I (OPEN SPACE/RECREACTION) 11 18.37 AC LOT In LOT 11" (OPEN SPACE (PRIVATE STREET) I LOT 'AA'R\1�0, 11 /SLOPE) 0.84 AC ( OPEN SPACE 0.92 AC I /SLOPE) 5.19 AC s,. (PUBLIC STREET) ' I 17.12 AC � I LOT "V" (PRIVATE DRIVE) 0.22 AC _ 202' 141' 60' I gg' NAP Lo I tog, APN: 766-110-005 MARIA J ALLGOOD o No z I to I 32' LOT 'FF' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 11.27 AC (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 14.32 AC I I \ N N89'46' 13"E 1017.53' LOT 'FF' ( OPEN SPACE \ ass • \ /SLOPE) \ - 11.27 �_cn - 199' - AC \ L 1g 199" �® 16300 - U N N 21g' - \ a w 136' - E _ 787' - 223- 214 9 • �� ._ T - 438' 334 h 38' `y \ LOT 'II' \ \ ( OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) ` 2.23 AC c''� 7; o I I h N 4 6 \ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) / \ \ 12.96 AC LOT 'GG' (OPEN SPACE LOT "G"I 9.111 AC / (PRIVATE STREET) \ / 1.48 AC \ \ / MI / Iw I 5 I w 1-70' - \ s'Q_\ 6 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) I 15.66 AC 0I \ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) (OPEN SPACE KK � \ / 24.69 AC /SLOPE ) 0.90 AC I I 42 (PUBLIC STREET) / TO BE QUITCLAIMED I 2 AC LOT 'FF' I 20� . (OPEN/SLOPE )CE \ sO 11.25 AC / LOT 'HH' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 16.20 AC to Lo N M co co a, APN: 766-110-015 i� CVWD O of O z 304, PARCEL 7A Lo o I Q J w U a N LOT 'JJ' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 1.68 AC to o M O i APN: 766-120-004 0 CVW0 W o wz 2 ib co w ♦w♦^^ v, f o� o � LOT 'LL (OPEN SPACE M i i� (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �9S I 7.56 AC LOT 'MM'- (OPEN SPACE 1.76 AC I I / /SLOPE) 0.76 AC ' N ;; N' I 11 \ \ �o of T (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL \ \ DEVELOPMENT) \ / / 21.37 AC SEE SHEET M-10 LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE RIGHT OF WAY LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' 07 0 z tl Q U a w a z I LLJ N O N N C v 1014 L5 P2 d Cd I N N 0 N N C d N O �7 w rn 'o00 o o z N89'51'46"W/, 30.00, W I Co H W Z 5 IM: 0 LL 0 J LLI04 Z O" 0 U UI I LOT 'GG' (OPEN SPACE I /SLOPE) 9.11 AC I I APN. 766-100-003 US4 4 31 I I I.L,I r 00 0 0 o I z I I I f I � 4 � I r c� C W W Cl) N89'47'50"E _199.63 W VWw - , / LOT 'YY" (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 3.19 AC TO /- Z _i�d TOE BE QUITCLAIMED 36 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 1.65 AC IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TFNTATI\/F TRAC:T MAP NCB `,17flR7 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE SHEET -09 1 --\ \ \ 489' 26 LOT KK R-so � 43' ( OPEN SPACE / / R=465' L= o') \�� Ste, \ 5 /SLOPE) // 's � \ \`s AC 1C \ ss- LOT a FFs (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 0.90 \ ( SLOPE) 24.69 11.25 AC AC 1000, LOT "C" s o / \ \ �t` / / (PRIVATE STREET) 7 5.42 AC I \ 5 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 75 / 1 / 6�S0 I 7.56 AC 57 I ' \ / o 1 LOT 'MM' I (OPEN SPACE rn ` /SLOPE) c° `/ 1.76 AC �a`O ^h 10 I LOT 'HH' I ( OPEN SPACE 5 /SLOPE) 16.20 AC N � 232 \ o a� \56 / �/ 0 6 LOT 'B' (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �`rs\ (PRIVATE STREET) 15.66 AC \ 9.62 AC I I I \ I \ \ R 64' LOT 'NN' (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 1 _ F;A Ar \ Nl� 85 • LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE ( - CENTERLINE �� 11 SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL -- RIGHT OF WAY DEVELOPMENT) 21.37 AC _ _ _ _ _ _ LOTLINE \\ EASEMENT LOT 'LL PARCEL LINE (OPEN /SLOPE)CE Ali LOT ACCESS 0.76 AC SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES �3 A PROPOSED 30' WIDE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES. 16 \ / TO BE QUITCLAIMED R=125 N !` 9 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 16.92 AC STREET) / 2 AC \ / / LOT '00' 10, (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) 3.59 AC \ \ \ LOT 11w / \ \ \ (OPEN SPACE CE / \ 2.87 AC / zool / 0000 O s9 W Q \ \ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 6.09 AC o A \ / �'9 \ LOT 'OO' 1 3S 35, (OPEN SPACE 00 / /SLOPE) o- / / 4.33 AC tiry TO BE QUITCLAIMED / / o / ✓ M / 1 0 05 f -AVENUE 62 �� ol g63' -"-7' 1 33 g1 �1 I (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 3.74 AC I•" LOT 'UU' \ ( OPEN SPACE LOT 'TT' /SLOPE) (OPEN SPACE/ 34 1.13 AC 6SLOPE/TRAIL) (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) K'I 6.11 AC w 8.39 AC II \ "o N \ / / / / \ \ / / ' 10 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) / 13.79 AC LOT 'W \moo TO BE QUITCLAIMED (OPEN SPACE \ /SLOPE) 2.87 AC LOT 'RR' \ ��� �s LOT 'M` / (OPEN SPACE ���• �``> \ (OPEN SPACE / �`� ��r. \ /SLOPE ) � 1.99 C \ °rr- \ 2.03 AC \ 32 \ �j• (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ \ \ 6.90 AC \ LOT 'SS' \ \ \ \ 9,• LOT limpI Cl)/\ \ (/SLOPE )CE (OPEN SPACE I I 2.83 AC /SLOPE) 1.57 AC I N 122' c5b \ \ \ I � \ SEE SHEET M-11 N IT u no VW v 1�1 100 50 0 100 200 300 LOT "C"°' 29 SCALE: 1"=100' (PRIVATE STREET) 5.42 AC / PREPARED BY: h Cam/ n +o 13PR T1 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL ENGINEERING O N U L TA N T p Q 1 o DEVELOPMENT) 4 ' 30.37 AC 27042 Towne Centre Drive, S u U 110 Foothill Ranch. CA 92610 (949) 716- 7460 ;1 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA 00 0 z a Q U a w a z uj I N N Cl N N C v 1015 IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA rn w V) �7 � � o rn N 35, 35, h 36 5 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL RE ESIDENTIAL EVEL PMENT) DEVELOPMENT) 1.65 AC II 1.1� AC LOT 'XX' 34 .901 / ( OPEN SPACE (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL /SLOPE) I� 1.57 AC U TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE SHEET M-10 (OPEN SPACE /SLOPE) \ LOT 'RR' 7.11 AC \ \ (OPEN SPACE OPE SJ FFF�\ /\ \ 11.99 AC (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ ��� / �N LOT 'TT' �� , s.so AC h LOT 'AF' F 890• n (OPEN SPACE (OPEN SPACE/ LOT 'SS' \ o /SLOPE) w° SLOPE/TRAIL) \ ��• 2.71 AC 6.11 AC (SLOPE) co \ \ 2.83 AC - \ J /c, \ I m - o z o s 290 ' LOT 11 BI, co / , 3s. / (PU 4 W fN I \ / /,C 1 i. i s .w. 0 0 o \ \ (PRIVATE STREET) \ J - 1*62 AC 18 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT)LOT 'B� 8.70 AC / (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL / (�RIVATE STREET) Ii�l / DEVELOPMENT) 9.62 AC N N \ /32 LOT 'ZZ' c , (OPEN SPACE � o 1 /SLOPE) C10) I N 16 \ \ 7l L�I 2.26 AC \ / � 3s LOT D 6 (PRIVATE STREET) N \ 4.31 AC N I I I LOT 'AE' \�336' - - - (OPEN SPACE/ SLOPE) 7.35 AC �. `� � -sue LOT 'AJ' � , LOT 'AC'/()T 139 °' - - 79' o �/ (OPEN SPACE 0 8i - �_ 13g �.k`' ;�/ 1 /SLOPE) 3 • coo \ (OPEN SPACE/ O� N / % 231 0\ .17 AC �p \ 11 SLOPE/TRAIL)C11 / _ _ 49 / \ \ 1 �w 28 81 (FUTURE PK18E���`OPEN SPA(' I �6 �� L$- 1'O'.1.34 AC ) \ 20'30 1 Ft%n5 221 05 1159'(FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) �•� �/ i 0-- \ 5% d l (OPEN SPACE/ 1.48 AC � / 29 SLOPE) 1 � 125 35' 1 � 1.14 AC '10 Oo s. / (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 1.94 AC 19 sA� LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY - - - LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES �1 A PROPOSED 10' WIDE EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. �3 A PROPOSED 30' WIDE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES. ❑4 A PROPOSED 60' WIDE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES. �5 A PROPOSED EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND WATER PURPOSES. 0 A PROPOSED EASEMENT FOR ELECTRICAL AND POWER PURPOSES. �7 A PROPOSED 10' WIDE EASEMENT FOR TRAIL PURPOSES. O� 0 \ `I - �\ 1 1 DEVELOPMENT) o `� -c" . ° 1 (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL W � \ I �, I , - LOT 'B' W \ 26 d 1(�/ (PRIVATE STREET) ` 15p� ♦_♦^ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL \ 9.62 AC 'Ii ,� 21 '' 3�9 v, DEVELOPMENT) � � i 39, R=1485 �,� L4 L=295 90 P _ R,503.54 AC 50� �56 / \ \ 1 w W \ 123' =-- R=1450' L=288'L-281_ I 21 1 \ G I 1 I * * (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 1 Lo \ �N S-�EET 100' 167 - 2 69' 25 , 22 LOT AI 10.71 AC q, 6, gyp_ (OPEN SPACE fa 11g 4 30 JI I^`� (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ /SLOPE) 7.28 AC 4.73 AC � 1 TO BE QUITCLAIMED I \ 1 \ 4 30 135' 2j 1� I 23 I o 1 W \TO E� QUITCLAIMED w A LOT 'AY' (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL I W \ F / LOOT SPACE A0 (OPEN SPACE MI DEVELOPMENT) (OPEN I I N 1 TW /SLOPE) /SLOPE) N LOT T 3 AC 3 5 0.46 AC 0 E RELOCATED 11 I 0.21 AC N N - W in I `� 30' 30' L' 1 1 (OPEN SPACE LOT 'AG' 1 W'^ /RECREATION) \rn °' ( OPEN SPACE I 60' '' V, I 5.53 AC \ \ 25 co /SLOPE) I LOT AH (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) `� 1 M .71 AC n 24 (OPEN SPACE o - 2.30 AC (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) I /SLOPE) o 3.55 AC 3.46 AC I I \ co o � \ \ o Ste• ^ � - /�� 1-1 !� I 1 ' _ Nay �. 100 153' I 9 E 9 17' �, LOT _ ��° ` (PRIVATE STREET) / �� ` - - - - - / \ �^ _ 67 Ra>J0, L`356' `2=4 AC �, , �.;L�� sty• rl �- 8�330' L=718' a o R 800� IM 43' R=3300=LL=712' 183' \ R\830, C`36g• - - 1 17' Iss, STREET AEA R=3270' L=705' \ \ `3S9' L`383' 142' 48' / �2. 705' 183' \ \ 26 STREET AFA-2°1 R 280' c, 249' - 20 \ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) 2 R=2 R 3 \ 254' - (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT) LOT R 142 L� LOT D � � � \ 3.54 AC �]7 Rc L=2g1, A w 9.74 AC 376' � � / �7 3¢0' C,3p8, �9' (ACCESS/WATER FACILITIES) 308' (PRIVATE STREET) (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) 5.57 AC 0 8.58 AC gg2' 183' \ \ \ I I^ 4.31 AC 146' 310' 54 132' 117 74' 32' 37' LOT 'AB' _ - - ��,'s• , 122 112' 182' \ (OPEN SPACE 154' N ,�� 40' 98, 48 403' 249 1g0' 54' Lo 0.88 AC COACHELLA VALLEY 127 27' 29 r 137' 128' 119, 3a' \�8, PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT 19' 74' LOT AM" OF LAAUG"MEAff SUBJECT TO QUMA APPROVAL THE CITY LOT "OA CONSERVATION LINE I 11 ' LOT 'AK' 151 COACHELLA VALLEY (OPEN SPACE MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT (OPEN SPACE) (OPEN SPACE ��11 /SLOPE) CONSERVATION LINE 113.06 AC /RESTRICTED) LOT "S" 3.68 AC 36.99 AC \ ^ (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) o ,n 3.11 AC o I^ I � I � SEE SHEET M-12 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' r- 00 0 z d Q U a w a Z Li I N N Cl N N C v 1016 L5 3 00 I N N 0 N N d N O ,7 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM SEE SHEET M-11 3 5 TO BE RELOCATED 15' LOT "S" 11 APN: 753-040-017 (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) 11 AC 37 11?AVERITNE CORP 3..0 N 54'' N (ACCESS/WATER FACILITIES) 8.58 AC 27' 27' Lo LOT R (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) 5.56 AC M TO BE QUITCLAIMED APN. 753-050-029 TRAVERTINE CORP A TO BE QUITCLAIMED 10 r W .8A; W � \ cl) 37 W (ACCESS/WATER ACACILITIES) Ill vJ PROPOSED WATER TANK rn LOT "0" (OPEN SPACE /RESTRICTED 36.99 AC LOT "M" (OPEN SPACE) 113.06 AC 4)g, 121• 184' LOT "N" APN: 753-060-003 TRAVERTINE CORP (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) \ 22.64 AC 1- COACHELLA VALLEY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION LINE 258' 229' 134 171' m 17\ N`1$ \S9' LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY — - - - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES N86-1 666.15' Zq.B p8' N� 415,1g E a ^'UPF' SO, O LOT " P" (OPEN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 56.00 AC I.LI vJ'2'^ Co r�V IA '�� N89'S126 '37"E 7.31' �— 30' ' 39 q.1 N7 ZA, 30' �•50 / 0'S aka 100 50 0 100 200 300 N89'56'16"W 1397.48' MARTINEZ ROCK SLIDE APN: 753-060-004 USA SCALE: 1"=100' °° �ti PREPARED BY: PROACTIVE Z ENGINEERING COf ULTAf T 27042 Towne Centre Drive, S uU 110 Foothill Ranch. CA 92610 (949) 716- 7460 t IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF 13'37 16 E 38.37 nivrnc'rrnr crerr nr nei irnnkue APN: 753-050-007 11Z4VERITNE CORP 4 00 r7 LLJ 0 z Q U a F- a Z LJ I N N O N N C v 1017 IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA T s dd F u u u u a rn w V) L5 P2 d N I N N 0 N N c d a, O �7 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM S59 T7S, WE, SBM APN: 753-040-009 SHENG PU LEE & CHIN LAND LEE APN: 753-040-010 CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION APN: 753-040-011 CURTIS WONG & LILLIAN WONG APN: 753-040-022 CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION N00'21'09"E 651.67' LOT "T" I (OPEN SPACE z /RECREATION) LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE -- RIGHT OF WAY — - - - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE <==> LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 30' �1 A PROPOSED 10' WIDE EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. �3 A PROPOSED 30' WIDE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES. �4 A PROPOSED 60' WIDE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES. �5 A PROPOSED EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND WATER PURPOSES. ❑6 A PROPOSED EASEMENT FOR ELECTRICAL AND POWER PURPOSES. �7 A PROPOSED 10' WIDE EASEMENT FOR TRAIL PURPOSES. 001 LOT "ABA AC (OPEN SPACE co o /SLOPE) APN: 753-040-013 m 0.88 AC / �` m DOUGLAS KIM & HAE KYUNG KIM APN: 766-100-003 USA APN: 753-040-014 CA rn �w / 'L TRAVERTINE CORP �+ 0) '� \ 27 30' m (FUTURE PARK/ OPEN SPACE) N00'04'28"E 651.83' o� 90 • A4 30' I � \ s z i LOT %Bw LOT yr 00 / PRIVATE STREET \ (OPEN SPACE bD Ln 124' ( �� \ /SLOPE) _ o 9.62 AC 6 3.19 AC = �ppAp S \ NO'08'14"E 1451.99' LOT R / i y / ,�� 13 ` \479 , 2 \ / (OPEN SPACE/RECREATION) // 0 w / �� `' / 28 \ 57 , / F / 5.56 AC LOT AAO� ` 0 0° �;'g /6 (FUTURE PARK/ g0? 4 6) O' M / w '`' o o OPEN SPACE) w (OPEN SPACE m - o � N — /SLOPE) p 6``�' 6'lO 1.34 AC 8g 0.23 AC O / O 35 10 / "000R' �,421.57 61 g �377.96' _ S�F 82 9 / LOT AZZ" N dL (FUTURE UDEVELOPMENT) RESIDENTIAL LOT AC (OPEN SPACE/ o \ �1.1\AC 356 Ste\ A \�A 1p \11110 SEE SHEET M-12 APN: 753-040-015 CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION N00'04'28"E 659.10' (OPEN SPACE/ SLOPE) 65' SLOPE) 2.26 AC 2.39 AC SEE SHEET M-11 LOT AXXA 162' SEE SHEET M-10 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' r- 00 uj z d Q U a a Z uj I N N Co N N C v 1018 I 30' I L_5 3 d O� N 00 I N N 0 N N c d N O �7 APN: 753-050-014 MARC AVRIETTE & LESLIE AVRIETTE APN: 753-050-013 TRAVERTINE CORP APN: 753-060-004 USA IN THE CITY OF LA QUIN TA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM LEGEND — — BOUNDARY LINE — CENTERLINE APN: 753-040-009 SHENG PU LEE & SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE CHIN LAND LEE -- RIGHT OF WAY - - - - — LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE APN: 753-050-024 RICHARD JOBE & LISA JOBE I 15 MARTINEZ ROCK SLIDE APN: 753-050-008 WILLARD KELSEY h N00'12'10"W N 13*37' 16"E \ 38.37' z 00 IR (P 0 O) w O APN: 753-050-017 CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION PR01 37 I -ER 1 8 AC LOT "P (OPEN SPACE/RESTRI( 56.00 AC S47 T7S, R7E, SBM KI(1l1-Fd '7i C- I 1 Z, A 0n, o� 97' SEE SHEET M-12 APN: 753-050-028 EMILIO CARL MELILLO LOT "0" 'EN SPACE/RESTRICTED) 36.99 AC APN: 753-040-010 CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION APN: 753-040-011 CURTIS WONG & LILL14N WONG z 00 co cn N N rri APN: 753-040-023 FRIENDS OF THE DESERT MOINTAIN N00'21 '08"E- 656.51 ' 15' 6 15'- APN: 753-040-016 TRAVERTINE CORP APN: 753-040-017 TRAVERTINE CORP —�I 15' <*==> LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES cr C w w r2 V♦ w rwn V♦ 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' r- 00 r'> ui r7 0 z d Q U a a H z Li I N N Cl N N C v 1019 W V) L5 d 0 M I N N 0 N N c d N O �7 MADISON STREET V TO BE QUITCLAIMEI LOT "AU" (OPEN SPACE /BASIN) 6.27 AC S03°03'00"E 25.26' 4 30' 53 30' To 00 cD o � o � N LOT "APB z (OPEN SPACE o /SLOPE) 0 2.59 AC S27°28'20'E 54.03' --842'��04_'S00° 12' 10"E 30.00' w ' 0' L=97' N89°47'50"E A W = R 145' N89°47'50"E 2110' 1 — w, w EX R/W N LOT "AV" (OPEN SPACE) 1.56 AC �33 LOT "L" (OPEN SPACE /BASIN) 20.69 AC 019 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37387 PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBM LEGEND APN: 766-280-062 \ CVWD \ APN: 766-280-007 CVWD \ EX. R/W \ CD M AVENUE 62 CD I 1 APN: 753-070-010 \ USA APN: 753-070-012 USA 1 0 1 0 0 r\ 0 1 APN: 764-280-056 CITY 1 OF = LA OUINTA 0 c - w _ O Q w I APN: 753-070-017 rw ❑ I APN: 753-070-027 V♦ I I I I I I i i I I I i R COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AVENUE 62 _ N89°47'44"E 2639.51' APN: 764-280-027 APN: 753-070-031 APN: 764-280-028 APN: 753-070-018 APN: 764-280-054 CITY OF LA OUINTA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TR 30023-1 MB 329/87-102 APN: 764-280-054 1\ APN: 753-070-028 APN: 764-280-030 I APN: 764-300-004 BOUNDARY LINE CENTERLINE SECTION LINE/ QUARTER SECTION LINE RIGHT OF WAY LOTLINE EASEMENT PARCEL LINE LOT ACCESS SEE SHEET M-02 FOR THE EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' r- 00 ui z d Q U a Q Z Li I N N Cl N N C v 1020 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT G DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Attn: City Clerk WITH A CONFORMED COPY TO: Travertine Land Company, LLC c/o Hofmann Land Development Company, LLC 3000 Oak Rd Walnut Creek, CA 94597 Attn: Lou Miramontes Exempt Recording Requested Per Govt. Code 6103 (Space Above This Line for Recorder's Use) TRAVERTINE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA and TRAVERTINE LAND COMPANY, LLC 61463025A 1021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS...................................................................................... 3 1.1 Definitions..............................................................................................................3 1.2 Exhibits................................................................................................................10 2. MUTUAL BENEFITS AND ASSURANCES................................................................ 10 2.1 Purposes of Agreement........................................................................................ 10 2.2 Undertakings and Assurances Contemplated and Promoted by Development Agreement Act.............................................................................. 11 3. OWNER'S OBLIGATIONS; FINANCING DISTRICTS; PUBLIC FACILITIES....... 12 3.1 In General............................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Financing District and Parameters....................................................................... 12 3.3 Dedication, Construction and Conveyance of Public Facilities ........................... 13 3.4 Provision of Real Property Interests by CITY ..................................................... 13 3.5 Fees and Payments............................................................................................... 13 3.6 Reimbursement of Costs...................................................................................... 13 3.7 Additional Facilities Financed by the Financing District .................................... 14 3.8 Notice to CITY of Product Sales Release............................................................ 14 3.9 Employment of La Quinta Residents and the Hiring of Local Businesses.......... 14 4. REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY......... 14 4.1 Applicable Rules.................................................................................................. 14 4.2 Development of the Project, Planned Development ............................................ 18 4.3 Limitations, Reservations and Exceptions........................................................... 19 4.4 Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reservations of Authority.............................................................................................................. 20 4.5 Regulation by other Public Agencies................................................................... 21 5. PERIODIC REVIEWS.................................................................................................... 21 5.1 Annual Review..................................................................................................... 21 5.2 Standards for Annual Review.............................................................................. 21 5.3 Certificate of Compliance.................................................................................... 22 6. SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS/TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES........ 22 6.1 Definition.............................................................................................................22 6.2 Short -Term Vacation Rental Use......................................................................... 22 i 61463025A 1022 6.3 Provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code ...................................................... 22 6.4 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions.............................................................. 22 7. TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNMENTS; TERMINATION UPON LOT SALE ............... 23 7.1 Transfer and Assignments of Rights and Interests .............................................. 23 7.2 Termination of Agreement Upon Sale of Lots to Public ..................................... 25 8. TERM OF AGREEMENT............................................................................................... 25 8.1 Term.....................................................................................................................25 8.2 Rights and Duties Following Termination........................................................... 25 9. AMENDMENT OR MODIFICATION TO THIS AGREEMENT ................................. 25 10. PROCESSING OF REQUESTS AND APPLICATIONS ............................................... 27 11. DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES ...................................... 27 11.1 Remedies in General............................................................................................ 27 11.2 Termination of Agreement for Default by OWNER ........................................... 28 11.3 Termination of Agreement for Default by CITY ................................................. 28 11.4 Termination by OWNER Prior to Bond Sale ...................................................... 28 11.5 Specific Performance........................................................................................... 29 11.6 Appointment of Referee....................................................................................... 30 11.7 Estoppel Certificates............................................................................................ 30 12. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION....................................................................................... 31 12.1 Indemnification.................................................................................................... 31 12.2 Option to Terminate............................................................................................. 31 12.3 Defense of Third -Party Claims............................................................................ 32 12.4 Cooperation and Cost Control............................................................................. 32 12.5 No Recourse for Inability to Perform Due to Judicial Determinations ............... 32 13. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ON TITLE........................................................................ 33 13.1 Covenants Run With the Land............................................................................. 33 13.2 No Dedication or Lien......................................................................................... 33 13.3 Constructive Notice and Acceptance................................................................... 34 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS OF CURE .................................. 34 14.1 Mortgagee Protection........................................................................................... 34 14.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated.................................................................................... 34 14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure ............................. 34 14.4 Bankruptcy...........................................................................................................35 ii 61463025.0 1023 15. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS................................................................................ 35 15.1 Recordation of Agreement................................................................................... 35 15.2 Severability..........................................................................................................35 15.3 Governing Law; Venue........................................................................................ 35 15.4 Section Headings................................................................................................. 35 15.5 Singular and Plural............................................................................................... 35 15.6 Time of Essence................................................................................................... 35 15.7 Waiver..................................................................................................................36 15.8 Force Majeure...................................................................................................... 36 15.9 Attorneys' Fees.................................................................................................... 36 15.10 Mutual Covenants................................................................................................ 36 15.11 Conveyances........................................................................................................36 15.12 Relationship of Parties......................................................................................... 36 15.13 Notices.................................................................................................................37 15.14 Further Actions and Instruments.......................................................................... 38 15.15 Successors and Assigns........................................................................................ 38 15.16 Counterparts.........................................................................................................38 15.17 Authority to Execute............................................................................................ 38 15.18 Entire Agreement................................................................................................. 38 in 61463025A 1024 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (Govt. Code Sections 65864-65869.5) THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into this day , 2024, by and between the City of La Quinta, a California municipal corporation and charter city organized under the Constitution of the State of California ("CITY"), and Travertine Land Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("OWNER"). CITY and OWNER are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party." RFC'.ITAIN This Agreement is entered into based upon the following facts: A. When used in these Recitals, each of the terms defined in Section 1 of this Agreement shall have the meaning given to it therein. B. Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 ("Development Agreement Act") authorize CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property within its jurisdiction for the development of such real property, in order to, among other things: encourage and, provide for the development of public facilities in connection with the development of new housing; provide certainty in the approval of development projects; encourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning that will make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public; provide assurance to developers that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, subject to their conditions of approval; and strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic costs of development. C. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Government Code, City has adopted its Development Agreement Ordinance (La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.020) establishing procedures and requirements for such development agreements ("Development Agreement Ordinance"). D. OWNER is the holder of a legal interest in the Property as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and shown on the Depiction of the Property, "Site Map attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Property"); and desires and intends to develop the Property for the uses and purposes set forth in the Development Plan, generally consisting of a planned community of residential, hospitality, open space, recreational amenities and other resident and visitor serving uses (collectively "Project"). The Project is more fully described in, and subject to (i) this Agreement, (ii) the Travertine Specific Plan, also known as Specific Plan No. SP2017-0004 ("Specific Plan"); (iii) the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project, considered and certified by the City Council and the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted by the City Council on , by City Council Resolution No. _(the " EIR"); (iv) General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2017- 0002; (v) Zone Change No. ZC 2017-0002; (vi) Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 2017-0008; and (vii) any future discretionary or ministerial approvals and/or permits issued for the Project (collectively, the "Project Site Development Permits"); (viii) any future subdivision maps approved for the Project (collectively, the "Future Tract Maps"); and (ix) the conditions of approval associated with each and all of the foregoing approvals (collectively, the "Conditions of Approval"). The documents, permits, approvals, and conditions described in the foregoing clauses (i)-(ix) are collectively referred to herein as the "Project Approvals," and are, or when approved or issued shall be, on file with the City Clerk The Development of the Property requires substantial early and major capital expenditures and investments with respect to the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities, both on -site and off -site, of 61463025A 1025 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT sufficient capacity to serve the residents and others using the Property as anticipated by the General Plan, the Specific Plan and this Agreement. E. OWNER owns fee simple title to the Site, and by their execution of this Agreement, CITY and OWNER consent to recordation of this Agreement against the Property. F. Consistent with Section 9.250.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, CITY and OWNER desire to enter into a binding agreement that shall be construed as a development agreement within the meaning of the Development Agreement Act. This Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning for, and will secure the orderly development of, the Property, ensure a desirable and functional community environment, provide effective and efficient development of public facilities, infrastructure, and services appropriate for the development of the Property, and assure attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the CITY, by achieving the goals and purposes of the Development Agreement Act. In exchange for these benefits to CITY, OWNER desires to receive the assurance that it may proceed with Development of the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Project Approvals, all as more particularly set forth herein G. In anticipation of the Development of the Property, OWNER has made application to CITY for certain approvals, entitlements, findings and permits required for the Development Plan, including, without limitation, an amendment to CITY's general plan in effect prior to the date of this Agreement, a specific plan, zone change, a vesting tentative tract map, and this Agreement. H. In accordance with State law and CITY charter, CITY has approved the amendment to and adopted the General Plan which considers and provides for the need for residential, commercial, industrial and other uses, and provides for the public services and circulation facilities that are necessary to meet the future needs of CITY and its population. I. CITY has approved the Project and granted the other Project Site Development Permits in order to protect the interests of City's existing and anticipated citizens and the quality of their community and environment through the specific plan process. As part of the process of approving the Project and the Project Site Development Permits, CITY has undertaken, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the required analyses of the environmental effects which may be caused by the Project and the Existing Development Approvals, and after making all appropriate findings and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, certified a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project. J. As consideration for the assurances provided by this Agreement, CITY has requested that OWNER provide, and OWNER is willing to provide, various public benefits as described in Exhibit D. of this Agreement. The public benefits set forth in Exhibit D include, but are not limited to, certain additional fee contributions and construction of certain public facilities that will benefit residents of CITY as well as future residents of the Property. CITY has determined that the public benefits for which OWNER is obligated, together with the Conditions of Approval imposed by CITY on the Project, adequately provide for the health, safety, and welfare needs of the future residents of the Property subject to the provisions of this Agreement with respect to future monitoring programs. K. On 20_, pursuant to the requirements of the Development Agreement Act, the CITY's Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on OWNER's application for this Agreement. 2 61463025A 1026 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT L On , 20_, pursuant to the requirements of the Development Agreement Act, the City Council of CITY conducted a duly noticed public hearing on OWNER'S application for this Agreement. M. The City Council of CITY has found and determined that this Agreement: (1) is consistent with CITY's General Plan and the Specific Plan; (2) is in the best interests of the health, safety and general welfare of CITY, its residents and the public; (3) is entered into pursuant to and constitutes a present exercise of the police power by CITY; and (4) is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of the Development Agreement Act. N. All actions taken by CITY have been duly taken in accordance with all applicable legal requirements, including CEQA, and all other requirements for notice, public hearings, findings, votes and other procedural matters. O. In accordance with the Development Agreement Act, the City Council has adopted Ordinance No. finding this Agreement consistent with the General Plan and the Specific Plan and authorizing the execution of this Agreement, and such ordinance shall become effective on , 20 . P. The Parties desire to enter this Agreement regarding the development and use of the Property and intend that this Agreement be considered a Development Agreement as authorized by the Development Agreement Act. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing Recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference, the mutual covenants contained herein and other consideration, the value and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS. 1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto shall be defined as follows: 1.1.1 "Agreement" means this Development Agreement and all amendments and modifications thereto between CITY and OWNER. 1.1.2 "Annual Review" means the annual review required pursuant to Section 5 below. 1.1.3 "Applicable Rules" means the rules, regulations, ordinances and officially adopted policies of the City of La Quinta in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Specific Plan. Additionally, notwithstanding the language of this Section or any other language in this Agreement, all specifications, standards and policies regarding the design and construction of public works facilities, if any, shall be those that are in effect at the time the Project plans are being processed for approval and/or under construction specified in Section 4.1. 1.1.4 "Assignment and Assumption Agreement" means an agreement under which an assignment of OWNER'S rights and obligations under this Agreement are transferred to another person or entity as specified in Section 7.1(c). 61463025A 1027 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 1.1.5 "Bonds" means the bonds, notes or other evidence of indebtedness issued by or for the Financing District. 1.1.6 `Building and Improvement Standards" means regulations of CITY that are of general application and which establish regulations and standards for the building, construction and installation of structures and associated improvements such as and including, without limitation, CITY's building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, grading, swimming pool, sign and fire codes. 1.1.7 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality Act, Sections 21000 through 21178 of the Public Resources Code, and the State CEQA Guidelines developed by the Office of Planning and Research and promulgated thereto. 1.1.8 "CFD" means a community facilities district formed pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Government Code Section 53311 et seq. as amended). 1.1.9 "CITY" means the geographical area within the boundaries of the City of La Quinta, a Charter law city and municipal corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of California, including each and every agency, department, board, commission, authority, employee, and/or official acting under the authority of the City, including without limitation the City Council and the Planning Commission. Unless otherwise specified herein or required by applicable law, any approval by City means an approval by City's City Manager. 1.1.10 "City Council" means the City Council of CITY. 1.1.11 "Conditions of Approval" shall have the meaning set forth in Recital D. 1.1.12 "CVWD" means the Coachella Valley Water District, a public water agency, formed and operating pursuant to state law. 1.1.13 "Developer" has the same meaning as in the OWNER in the preamble to this Agreement. 1.1.14 "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project, including without limitation: grading and construction of infrastructure and Public Facilities related to the Project (whether located within or outside the Property); construction of structures and buildings; and installation of landscaping. "Development" shall not include the maintenance, repair, reconstruction or redevelopment of any structures, improvements or facilities after completion of the initial construction thereof. 1.1.15 "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code. 1.1.16 "Development Approval so" means site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use of every kind and nature approved or granted by CITY in connection with the Development of the Property, including but not limited to: specific plans, zone changes, general plan amendments, EIR certifications, tentative and final subdivision tract maps, vesting tentative maps, conditional use permits, and grading, building and other similar permits. M 61463025A 1028 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 1.1.17 "Development Exactions" means the requirements of CITY in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulations or Development Approvals for the dedication of land or property, the payment of fees or money, or the construction or improvement of public facilities in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the adverse impacts of the Project on environmental or other public concerns or interests or for the improvement, construction or acquisition of any public infrastructure, facilities or property. The term shall not include assessments and taxes unless exacted as a condition of development under a Development Approval. 1.1.18 "Development Impact Fees" means any and all fees imposed and authorized pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Section 66000 et seq. of the California Government Code, and any and all CITY ordinances, resolutions, and policies implementing the same, including but not limited to the La Quinta Municipal Code. 1.1.19 "Discretionary Action" means an action which allows for the exercise of judgment, deliberation or a decision on the part of City, including any board, commission, committee, or department or any officer or employee thereof, to shape the project by requiring modifications which could respond to any of the concerns which might be identified by environmental review in the process of approving or disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from an activity which merely requires City, including any board, commission or department or any officer or employee thereof, to determine whether there has been compliance with statutes, ordinances, regulations, or other fixed standards and the agency has no discretionary authority to deny or shape the project. 1.1.20 "Discretionary Permits" means any permits, approvals, plans, Future Tract Maps, inspections, certificates, documents, and licenses that require a Discretionary Action, including, without limitation, site development permits, grading permits, stockpile permits, and encroachment permits. 1.1.21 "Development Plan" means the Travertine Specific Plan adopted by the City Council on , 20_, by Ordinance - 1.1.22 "Economic Expectations" means the reasonable, investment - based economic expectations with respect to the completion of the Project in accordance with the Applicable Rules, taking into consideration technical, financing, market and other factors. 1.1.23 "Effective Date" means the date that this Agreement is recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County, California. 1.1.24 "EIR" means the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Travertine Specific Plan, State Clearinghouse Number 2018011023 certified by CITY Council Resolution No. - on , 20 1.1.25 "Estoppel Certificate" means the certificate provided at the request of either Party as further defined and described in Section 11.7. 1.1.26 "Existing Development Approvals" means those certain Development Approvals applicable to the Property in effect on the Effective Date, including without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" that are included as a part of the Existing Land Use Regulations listed on Exhibit C. 1.1.27 "Existing Land Use Regulations" means the Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement, including without limitation: (a) the 5 61463025.0 1029 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT permitted uses of the Property, (b) the density and intensity of use, maximum height and setback requirements of proposed buildings, (c) provisions for the reservation and dedication of land for public purposes, (d) traffic study guidelines, (e) requirements for Development Exactions, and (f) standards regarding buildings and improvements, a list of which is set forth on Exhibit C. A separate binder containing all Existing Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date, and a computer disk thereof, shall be delivered to each Party on the Effective Date, and maintained by each Party for future reference. 1.1.28 "Financing District" or "District" means one or more CFDs authorized pursuant to State law for purposes of financing and/or acquiring one or more public improvements, public facilities, public services or public facilities fees within the CITY. 1.1.29 "Future Tract Maps" shall have the meaning set forth in Recital D. 1.1.30 "General Plan" means the General Plan of CITY as said General Plan exists on the Effective Date of this Agreement (which includes Amendment No. - GPA, adopted by CITY on , 20_, pursuant to Resolution No. -__). 1.1.31 "Impact Fees" means impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, assessments or fair share charges or other similar impact fees or charges imposed on and in connection with new development by City, including Development Impact Fees and Quimby Fees. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, none of the following shall constitute Impact Fees: (i) Processing Fees, (ii) impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, assessments or fair share charges or other similar fees or charges imposed by other governmental entities and which City is required to collect or assess pursuant to applicable law, including, without limitation, school district impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65995, fees required pursuant to the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, or (c) other City-wide fees or charges of general applicability, provided that such City-wide fees or charges are not imposed as an impact fee on new development. 1.1.32 "Insubstantial Modification" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9(a) of this Agreement. 1.1.33 "Land Use Regulations" means any regulations or policies of CITY governing the permitted uses of land, density and intensity of use and the design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of property, including, but not limited to, City's General Plan, Zoning Code, Development Approvals, Development Exactions and all other ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations adopted or utilized by CITY for the processing of development projects. The term Land Use Regulations does not include, however, regulations relating to the conduct of business, professions and occupations generally; taxes and assessments other than Development Exactions; regulations for the control and abatement of nuisances; encroachment and other permits and the conveyances of rights and interests that provide for the use of or entry upon public property; and, any exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1.1.34 "Ministerial Permits and Approvals" means the permits, approvals, plans, inspections, certificates, documents, licenses, and all other actions required to be taken by CITY in order for Developer to implement, develop and construct the Project and the Mitigation Measures, including without limitation, building permits, foundation permits, and other similar permits and approvals which are required by the La Quinta Municipal Code and Project plans and other actions required by the Project Approvals to implement the Project and the no 61463025A 1030 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Mitigation Measures. Ministerial Permits and Approvals shall not include any Discretionary Actions or Discretionary Permits. 1.1.35 "Mitigation Measures" means the mitigation measures described in the EIR and in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program approved and adopted for the Project. 1.1.36 "Mortme" means a mortgage, deed of trust or sale and leaseback arrangement or other transaction in which the Property, or a portion thereof or an interest therein, is pledged as security, contracted for in good faith and for fair value. 1.1.37 "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the property, or interest therein, subject to a Mortgage. 1.1.38 "New Laws" means amendments or modifications to the Applicable Rules, and all ordinances, resolutions, initiatives, regulations, rules, laws, plans, policies, and guidelines of the CITY and its City Council, Planning Commission, and all other CITY boards, commissions, departments, agencies, and committees enacted or adopted after the Effective Date. 1.1.39 "OWNER" means Travertine Land Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its successors and assigns. 1.1.40 "OWNER's Obli ate" means the obligations of OWNER to pay the sums, build and construct the improvements, dedicate the lands and improvements and undertake and perform the other actions described in Section 3 and the Description of Public Benefits described on Exhibit D. 1.1.41 "Parties" means collectively Developer and CITY. Each shall be referred to in the singular as a "Party". 1.1.42 "Planning Commission" means the CITY Planning Commission and the planning agency of the CITY pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867. 1.1.43 "Potential Public Properties" means the properties listed on Exhibit F which OWNER shall reserve for purchase by CITY. 1.1.44 "Processing Fees" means all processing fees and charges required by City to cover the City's cost of processing permits and other land use entitlements and conducing the associated inspections, including, but not limited to, fees for filing land use applications, plan check fees, inspection fees, and other processing or administrative fees. Processing Fees shall not include Impact Fees. The amount of the Processing Fees to be applied in connection with the development of the Project shall be the amount which is in effect on a City- wide basis at the time an application for the City action is made. Notwithstanding the language of this Section or any other language in this Agreement, Developer shall not be exempt from the payment of fees, if any, imposed on a City-wide basis as part of City's program for storm water pollution abatement mandated by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and subsequent amendments thereto, unless a waiver of these fees is provided by City in a subsequent agreement. 1.1.45 "Project" means the development project defined in Recital D and contemplated by the Development Plan with respect to the Property, including but not limited to on -site and off -site improvements, and as further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 7 61463025A 1031 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 1.1.46 "Project Approvals" shall have the meaning set forth in Recital I� 1.1.47 "Pro e " has the same meaning as set forth in Recital D and is further defined to mean those certain lands comprising approximately 855.4 acres of land within the boundaries of City as to which OWNER or a related party has a legal interest on the Effective Date, as described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B. 1.1.48 "Public Facilities" means those certain lands and facilities to be improved, constructed, and dedicated or conveyed to the public pursuant to Section 3.1, as described in Exhibit D, including, but not limited to, utility, infrastructure and transportation improvements, as well as fees required to be paid to mitigate the impact on public services as a result of the development of the Project. 1.1.49 "Public Works" means certain improvements constructed by OWNER or under the direction of OWNER that are considered to be a public work requiring the payment of prevailing wages under Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. 1.1.50 "Reservations of Authority" means the rights and authority excepted from the assurances and rights provided to OWNER in Section 4.1 and reserved to CITY therein and in Section 4.3. 1.1.51 "Reserved Powers" means the rights and authority excepted from this Agreement's restrictions on City's police powers and which are instead reserved to City, its City Council, Planning Commission, and all other City boards, commissions, departments, agencies, and committees. The Reserved Powers include the powers to enact or adopt New Laws or take future Discretionary Actions after the Effective Date of this Agreement that may be in conflict with the Applicable Rules and Project Approvals, except such New Laws which would prevent, or materially impair OWNER's Developer's ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project Approvals; provided, however, that with respect to such New Laws which would conflict with this Agreement or prevent, or materially impair OWNER's Developer's ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project Approvals, such New Laws shall apply to the Project only if such New Laws are: (1) necessary to protect the public health and safety, and are generally applicable on a City-wide basis (except in the event of natural disasters as found by the City Council such as floods, earthquakes and similar acts of God, which shall apply even if not applicable on a City- wide basis); (2) amendments to Uniform Codes, as adopted by City, and/or the La Quinta Municipal Code, as applicable, regarding the construction, engineering and design standards for private and public improvements to be constructed on the Site; (3) required by a non - City governmental entity to be adopted by or applied by the City (or, if adoption is optional, the failure to adopt or apply such non -City law or regulation would cause the City to sustain a significant loss of funds or loss of access to significant funding or other resources), or (4) necessary to comply with state or federal laws and regulations (whether enacted previous or subsequent to the Effective Date of this Agreement). 1.1.52 "Roadway Capacity Utilization" means the extent to which Traffic Generation from the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan will utilize the capacity of existing and planned future roads, freeways, freeway ramps and intersections in the City and surrounding area as more fully described in Section 4.4(b). 1.1.53 "Schedule of Performance" means the schedule for the development of the Project as set forth in Exhibit "H" attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. 61463025A 1032 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 1.1.54 "Short -Term Vacation Rentals Regulations" means Chapter 3.25 (or successor chapter) of the La Quinta Municipal Code that governs the application, permitting, renewal, use, operation, penalties, and other provisions relating to short-term vacation rentals in the City, in effect at the time during the Term of this Agreement, except to the extent any provision in Chapter 3.25 directly conflicts with the rights vested as set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement. 1.1.55 "Site" means approximately 855.4 acres of real property located southwest of Avenue 60, east, north and south of Avenue 62, and southwest of Madison Street, in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California. The Site is legally described in the Property Legal Description and depicted in the Property Map, attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively. 1.1.56 "Site Development Plan" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9.180.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 1.1.57 "Site Map" means the map of the Site and immediately adjacent properties, which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.1.58 "Specific Plan" shall have the meaning as set forth in Recital D. 1.1.59 "Term" means the period of time for which the Agreement shall be effective in accordance with Section 8 herein. 1.1.60 "TOT" means Transient Occupancy Tax levied by the City, in accordance with Chapter 3.24 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and applicable state law, and deposited into the City's general fund after remittance by all operators (or other entities or individuals) subject to the tax. 1.1.61 "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all discretionary actions or discretionary approvals required or requested with respect to the Project pursuant to the Existing Land Use Regulations following the Effective Date. 1.1.62 "Traffic Generation" means the future traffic that will be generated by the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan as more fully described in Section 4.4(b). 1.1.63 "Transferee" means individually or collectively, Developer's successors in interest, assignees or transferees of all or any portion of the Site. 1.1.64 "Uniform Codes" means those building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire and other similar regulations of a City-wide scope which are based on recommendations of a multi -state professional organization and become applicable throughout the City, such as, but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Electrical Code, the Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, or the Uniform Fire Code (including those amendments to the promulgated uniform codes which reflect local modification to implement the published recommendations of the multi -state organization and which are applicable City-wide). 1.1.65 "Vesting" means the later of (i) the Effective Date of this Agreement, and (ii) the running of all applicable statute of limitations and referendum petition deadlines to challenge the Project Approvals with no legal challenge or petition having been filed or submitted, or if filed or submitted, successfully resolved to the satisfaction of Developer and City. X 61463025A 1033 Code. DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 1.1.66 "Zoning Ordinance" means Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal 1.2 Exhibits. The reference to a specified "Exhibit" in this Agreement is a reference to any one of the exhibits listed below, as determined by the accompanying letter designation, which exhibits are attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Exhibit A Legal Description of Property Exhibit B Depiction of the Property Exhibit C Existing Land Use Regulations Exhibit D Description of Public Benefits Exhibit E Form of Grant Deed / Offer for Public Facilities Exhibit F Financing of Public Facilities and Potential Public Properties Exhibit G Chapter 3.25 of La Quinta Municipal Code as of Effective Date 2. MUTUAL BENEFITS AND ASSURANCES. 2.1 Purposes of Agreement. The Development Plan is the result of years of planning effort by both OWNER and CITY. Because of this extended planning effort, the Development Plan includes a number of public facilities and other features that will significantly benefit the public as well as occupants of the Project. To secure these benefits, CITY and OWNER have mutually agreed to enter into this Agreement, which (a) assures the Parties' participation in the construction, funding and dedication of numerous public facilities that will provide significant benefits for residents of CITY and service anticipated levels of occupancy within the Property, and (b) assures OWNER that the Development of the Property will be governed by the Existing Land Use Regulations and that the Development Exactions required in connection with the Development Plan will be those specified in this Agreement and the Existing Development Approvals. The following is a list of some of the more significant public benefits listed on Exhibit D that are anticipated in the event OWNER proceeds with the Development of the Project: (a) Fiscal Contributions: generation of substantial annual revenue for CITY's general fund and the CITY accounts, as well as substantial payments of development impact fees for use in enhancing fire and police equipment and staffing, school fees and library equipment; (b) Public Access and Open Space: provision of approximately 357.1 acres of open space, which includes (a) approximately 55.9 acres to be dedicated or used for public recreational, staging areas, gathering areas and trail purposes, open space uses including picnic tables, barbeques, golf practice facilities, and staging facilities for the public regional interpretative trail and (b) preservation of approximately 301.2 acres for conservation and preservation purposes together with endowment funding at no cost to CITY to ensure management and monitoring of the natural open space in perpetuity). In addition, the Project will provide pedestrian walkways, a network of interior trails suitable for pedestrian use and bike 10 61463025A 1034 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT lanes, including Class II bike lanes located along both sides of Jefferson Street that will allow bicyclists and pedestrians access to surrounding parks, recreational trails, open space and commercial centers; (c) Transportation and Traffic Improvements: beautification of Jefferson Street (including widening, surfacing, curb and gutter placement, addition of Class II bike lanes located along both sides of Jefferson Street, and landscape improvements); installation of traffic signals and numerous right and left -turn lanes on a number of City streets; and various improvements to Avenue 62 that will reduce roadway flooding during storm events and stabilize slopes to improve public safety; (d) Infrastructure Upgrades/Enhancements: construction and upgrades of domestic water system facilities, water tanks and pump stations; construction and extension of on -site and off -site sewers, storm drains, water, electricity, natural gas and other facilities; installation of water quality basins and use of biological filtering swales to enhance runoff to receiving waters at Dike 4; (e) Use of Sustainable Features in Project Design: as described more fully in the Development Plan and EIR, incorporation of energy -efficient and conservation - oriented features within the Project, including installing green roofs and solar panels on buildings within the Specific Plan, incorporating in -home batteries and EV charger stations to facilitate use of EVs, golf carts and other low -speed electric vehicles; requiring all single-family homes to be electric ready and include electrical circuits for space heating, water heating, ovens, clothes dryers; requiring electrical panels, branch circuits and transfer switches for battery storage; considering orientating buildings to reduce the development's impact on the natural environment; implementing passive and active solar systems to take advantage of and consider the year-round abundant sunshine; implementing a water conservation strategy demonstrating a 20 percent reduction in indoor and outdoor water usage; implementation 50 percent waste diversion in order to reduce the amount of waste disposal at landfills; requiring use of "green" building techniques, home features utilizing low -flow bathroom fixtures and that all household and other appliances be of the highest energy efficiency practicable at the time of purchase ; requiring use of environmentally -conscious site planning, so that street, trail, park and housing locations are situated to minimize vehicular trips and reduce exhaust emissions; requiring that all landscaping be desert and other drought tolerant vegetation; requiring all HVAC systems to be Very High Efficiency HVAC (SEER 16/80% AFUE or 9HSPF) or greater efficiency; requiring all domestic hot water systems be Very High Efficiency Water (0.92 Energy Factors) with Enhanced Solar Pre -heat System (min. 0.35 Net Solar Fraction); and requiring all potable water fixtures to have EPA WaterSense Certification or greater efficiency. 2.2 Undertakings and Assurances Contemplated and Promoted by Development Agreement Act. The mutual undertakings and assurances described above and provided in this Agreement are for the benefit of CITY and OWNER and promote the comprehensive planning, private and public cooperation and participation in the provision of public facilities, and the effective and efficient development of infrastructure and facilities, in connection with the implementation of development projects as contemplated and promoted by the Development Agreement Act. 11 61463025A 1035 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 3. OWNER'S OBLIGATIONS; FINANCING DISTRICTS; PUBLIC FACILITIES. 3.1 In General. (a) Public Benefits. It is acknowledged that a primary purpose of this Agreement is to provide for the accelerated and coordinated completion of Public Facilities and the other public benefits described in Exhibit D. Accordingly, in the event OWNER proceeds with Development of the Project, OWNER shall fully perform OWNER's Obligations as set forth in and subject to the terms and conditions of Exhibit D and this Agreement, including but not limited to the undertakings in connection with the construction and dedication or conveyance of the Public Facilities. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, CITY acknowledges and agrees that other than for OWNER's obligations with respect to the Jefferson Street circulation improvements described in Exhibit D (which obligations will become effective upon the issuance by CITY to OWNER of the first permit for mass grading of the Project), OWNER shall have no obligations with respect to any matter described in Exhibit D until the issuance by CITY to OWNER of the first building permit for a residential dwelling unit (other than for model homes) within the Project. (b) Existing Conditions and Undertakings. OWNER shall continue to be obligated to, and shall perform all of the duties and obligations provided for or required by any provisions of the General Plan, the Development Plan and the Existing Development Approvals in connection with the Development of the Property. 3.2 Financing District and Parameters. (a) Formation of Financing District(s). Upon the receipt of a written request ("Request") by OWNER in a form and content consistent with Subsection (c) below and reasonably acceptable to CITY, CITY will use its best efforts to form one or more Financing Districts in the form and type specified in the Request, which will include the Property, or portion thereof, within its/their boundaries for the purpose of funding the planning, design, construction and/or acquisition of Public Facilities and/or Potential Public Properties, or to provide for operation and maintenance as agreed upon by OWNER and CITY, and will cause the Financing District(s) to issue, from time to time, Bonds subject to market conditions to finance such activities (including, without limitation, all costs of forming and administering the Financing District(s) and issuing and selling such Bonds). Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Section is not intended to limit the ability of the Parties to create other forms of financing districts regarding the Project upon mutual agreement. In addition, if City elects to not act as the lead agency for the establishment of a Financing District, at Owner's request, City agrees that another agency authorized to establish a Financing District, such as the California Statewide Communities Development Authority ("CSCDA") may act as the lead agency in establishing the Financing District(s). In that event, City shall enter into a joint community facilities agreement with such other agency pursuant to Government Code Section 53316.2 authorizing such other agency to establish the Financing District consistent with the applicable provisions of Exhibit F. (b) No Obligation to Form District(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring CITY or its City Council to form a Financing District or cause a Financing District to issue Bonds. (c) Parameters Regarding Districts. In the event that one or more Financing Districts are formed to provide funding for the construction or acquisition of Public Facilities or Potential Public Properties, or both, the Parties agree that the parameters set forth on Exhibit F shall govern the formation of each Financing District and issuance of Bonds. 12 61463025A 1036 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 3.3 Dedication, Construction and Conveyance of Public Facilities. (a) In General. The Public Facilities to be dedicated or conveyed (in the case of lands) or constructed by OWNER and dedicated or conveyed to CITY as described in Exhibit D, shall be completed in accordance with the provisions of Exhibit D, the Existing Development Approvals, and designs, specifications and standards promulgated by CITY in accordance with Existing Land Use Regulations, and dedicated or conveyed to CITY as set forth in Exhibit D or in any other Exhibit attached hereto or agreed in writing by CITY. (b) Public Facilities; Subdivision Requirements. With respect to any such Public Facilities as to which only a preliminary phase is required to be completed under this Agreement as provided in Exhibit D, such Public Facilities shall be completed in connection with the Development of the Property as required by the Existing Land Use Regulations unless otherwise provided in this Agreement. (c) Public Works; Prevailing Wages. To the extent improvements to be constructed by OWNER or under the direction of OWNER hereunder are considered to be a public work requiring the payment of prevailing wages under Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. ("Public Works"), OWNER shall cause the contractor and subcontractors to pay prevailing wages in the construction of the improvements as those wages are determined pursuant to California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and implementing regulations of the California Department of Industrial Relations and comply with the other applicable provisions of Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and implementing regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations. 3.4 Provision of Real Property Interests by CITY. In any instance where OWNER is required to construct any Public Facilities on lands not owned by OWNER, as a condition precedent to the performance of such obligation, CITY shall provide or cause to be provided the real property rights and interests necessary for the construction of such Public Facilities. Costs associated with such acquisition or condemnation proceedings, if any, shall be OWNER's responsibility, and may be included in the applicable Financing District. 3.5 Fees and Payments. OWNER has agreed to pay fees to CITY to fund the provision of police, fire and other services set forth in Exhibit D. 3.6 Reimbursement of Costs. Unless otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, OWNER shall reimburse CITY for costs and expenses incurred by CITY on and after the Effective Date as necessary for the implementation of the Development Plan and this Agreement as follows: (a) Standard Fees. OWNER shall reimburse CITY for the following items in accordance with CITY's standard fee schedule in effect at the time of the Effective Date: (i) plan check, issuance and inspection of building permits; (ii) inspections related to construction of Public Facilities; (iii) review and processing of documents related to the conveyance of Public Facilities from OWNER to CITY; (iv) review and processing of documents related to Subsequent Development Approvals as requested or submitted by OWNER; and, (v) environmental review in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals as required by CEQA; (b) Reasonably Necessary Costs. OWNER shall reimburse CITY for any and all reasonable costs and expenses, including reasonably necessary consulting and 13 61463025A 1037 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT attorneys' fees, incurred by CITY ("reasonably necessary costs") in connection with the following items: (i) periodic compliance reviews pursuant to Section 5; (ii) formation of Financing Districts, the issuance of Bonds and any other matters contemplated by or related to Section 3.2 in accordance with Exhibit F; (iii) review and processing of OWNER's request to approve an Assignment and Assumption Agreement as provided in Section 7; and, (iv) negotiation, purchase and financing of property for public use pursuant to Section 3.7. 3.7 Additional Facilities Financed by the Financing District. OWNER shall cooperate with CITY regarding potential other facilities to be financed by a Financing District. Approval of any such facilities by CITY shall be contingent on CITY's prior compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code, § § 21000 et seq. 3.8 Notice to CITY of Product Sales Release. Subject to the reasonable cooperation of merchant builders within the Project, OWNER shall use good faith efforts to provide notice to CITY at least ten days prior to advertising the initial sales release of each builder product type within the Project. CITY shall have the right, at its cost, to publish such information on its public access channel or through use of any other media source to residents of City. Such advance notice shall not affect in any manner the sales price, qualifications to purchase, or any other terms or conditions of sale for homes within the Project, all of which shall be established by each respective merchant builder in connection with the marketing and sale of their product. 3.9 Employment of La Quinta Residents and the Hiring of Local Businesses. OWNER shall encourage its contractors and merchant builders who participate in the Development to make reasonable efforts to provide opportunities for employment to residents of City possessing the proper qualifications and experience for available positions. OWNER shall also encourage its contractors and merchant builders to consider use or retention of properly qualified and experienced City residents and local businesses and vendors in the provision of goods and services used in connection with development of the Project. In no event is this policy meant to require that contractors and merchant builders contract for services or supplies with less competitive firms or to employ residents who are not properly qualified or experienced solely due to local residency. 4. REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. 4.1 Applicable Rules. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Development Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Property are the Existing Land Use Regulations, including without limitation the General Plan and the Development Plan. (a) Permitted Uses. The uses permitted hereunder in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations are as set forth in the Development Plan. (b) Number of Units, Density and Intensity-. The total number, density and intensity of units permitted hereunder in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations 14 61463025A 1038 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT are as set forth in the Development Plan. The density of development may be distributed by OWNER disproportionately throughout the Property in accordance with and subject to the Development Plan. OWNER shall construct the Project on the Site only in accordance with the Project Approvals. As depicted in the Project Approvals, as the same may be updated or amended from time to time consistent with the terms hereof, the residential portions of Project shall consist of residential single-family development specifically developed and available for residential purposes, and may be the residents' primary residences or secondary residences, and/or may be used for short-term vacation rentals, with the following components: (1) Annual permitting fees to be consistent with the City's fee program; (2) Any rental or occupancy of thirty (30) nights or less to be subject to the City's then -current transient occupancy tax (TOT) for short-term vacation rentals; (3) Rental or occupancy agreements, and material renter or occupant information, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years (or other retention period as maybe approved by City policy or code) by the OWNER or OWNER's authorized management company for the short-term vacation rentals at the Site; (4) Occupancy in any residence, including residences used as short-term vacation rentals, shall be capped at two (2) persons per bedroom, plus one (1) person; provided, however, that there may be an increase in occupancy allowances for permitted short-term vacation rentals as set forth in the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations in effect as of the date of the issued permit, or, if the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations (or relevant provisions regarding occupancy allowances) are repealed for any reason of this Agreement), then the occupancy allowances for permitted short-term vacation rentals shall be the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations most recently in effect prior to being repealed and shall remain applicable for the balance of the Term of this Agreement; and (5) All residences at the Site shall allow for transient occupancy, which means occupancy for thirty (30) days or less. (c) Maximum Height and Size of Buildings. The maximum height and size of the buildings within the Property permitted hereunder in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations are as set forth in the Specific Plan. (d) Golf TrainingFacility and Resort Component. Inclusion by City of parcels in the Development Plan for a golf training component shall have an underlying residential zoning designation to enable the parcel to be developed with residential land uses. If within three (3) years from the Effective Date, Owner is unsuccessful in marketing the golf training parcel to a commercial developer, Owner shall be entitled to develop the parcel with residential land uses. In such case, the number of residential units developed on said parcel shall be included in the maximum density permitted by the Specific Plan. "Marketing" for purposes of this provision shall mean undertaking reasonable efforts to advertise the property to commercial developers. 15 61463025A 1039 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (e) Reservations and Dedication of Lands for Public Purposes and Undertaking to Participate in Completion of Roadways and Public Facilities. As provided in Section 3, OWNER is obligated to dedicate, sell or convey certain lands and construct and convey to CITY certain Public Facilities and to provide certain public benefits. (f) Timing of Development. The Parties acknowledge that the most efficient and economic Development of the Property depends upon numerous factors such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, competition and similar factors and that generally it will be most economically beneficial to the ultimate purchasers to have the rate of Development determined by OWNER. Accordingly, the timing, sequencing and phasing of Development shall be as determined by OWNER in its sole subjective business judgment and discretion. In Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal. 3d 465, the California Supreme Court held that a construction company was not exempt from a city's growth control ordinance notwithstanding that the construction company and the city had entered into a consent judgment (tantamount to a contract under California law) establishing the company's vested rights to develop its property in accordance with the zoning. The California Supreme Court reached this result on the basis that the consent judgment failed to address the timing of development. It is the intent of the Parties to avoid the result of the Pardee case by acknowledging and providing in this Agreement that OWNER shall have the vested right, subject to the Applicable Rules, to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such time as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of OWNER's sole subjective business judgment, notwithstanding the adoption of an initiative after the Effective Date of this Agreement by CITY's electorate to the contrary. (g) Moratoria; Phasing of Development. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Applicable Rules contemplate and provide for the phasing of the Development of the Property, and that except as expressly provided in this Section 4, no initiative, referendum, moratorium, ordinance, resolution, or other Land Use Regulation or limitation on the conditioning, rate, timing or sequencing of the Development of the Property or any portion thereof shall apply to or govern the Development of the Property during the term hereof whether affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative, or final), building or site development plans or permits, occupancy permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use to be approved, issued or granted by CITY. In the event of any such subsequent action, OWNER shall continue to be entitled to apply for and receive Development Approvals in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations, subject only to the exercise of the Reservations of Authority set forth in Section 4.3 and the terms of this Agreement. (h) Development Exactions. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing (except and subject to the Reservations of Authority), CITY shall not levy or require any further Development Exactions for the Project except those provided for in Section 3 or which are provided for or required by or pursuant to the Existing Land Use Regulations (including, but not limited to the existing General Plan, the Development Plan, and Existing Development Approvals) which include, but are not limited to, Development Exactions that may be required by CITY in accordance with its current subdivision standards and policies (including, without limitation, as to the amount, time and method of payment). (i) Dedications/Conveyances/Acquisitions. At the appropriate points in the Development of the Project and in accordance with Exhibit D, OWNER shall convey, irrevocably offer to dedicate, or reserve for acquisition by CITY or its successor, assignee, or designee the Public Facilities, including streets, rights -of -way, park land and other improvements as more fully set forth in Exhibit D. 16 61463025A 1040 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 0) Expeditious Processing. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal and legal manner for processing such matters, all applications for future Ministerial Permits and Approvals, Discretionary Permits and Discretionary Approvals contemplated by, required under or necessary to affect the intent of this Agreement. Provided that the tentative tract map, parcel map and precise development plan and other applications are consistent with the Development Plan, CITY shall take final action on such applications within the time frames set forth in the Permit Streamlining Act, California Government Code Sections 65920 et seq., unless an extension is agreed to by OWNER. (k) Subsequent Development Approvals. The Development Plan provides for CITY to process and consider subsequent discretionary approvals and permits for the Project, such as tentative subdivision maps, under the terms of the Existing Land Use Regulations. CITY acknowledges pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.2 that the conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for Subsequent Development Approvals processed with CITY for the Project shall not prevent development of the Property for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the Development Plan and in this Agreement. Upon approval, a Subsequent Development Approval shall become part of the Existing Land Use Regulations. (1) Amendments to Development Plan. The Parties anticipate that, from time to time, OWNER may request amendments to the Development Plan to respond to changing circumstances and conditions. CITY is under no obligation to approve any such application and may, in the exercise of its legislative discretion, approve, deny or propose conditions to or modifications in any such application by OWNER for an amendment to the Development Plan, including conditions or modifications that might otherwise be prohibited by the vested rights provided by this Agreement. OWNER will have a reasonable opportunity to review any such proposed conditions and modifications and withdraw its application for amendment to the Development Plan (in which case neither OWNER'S proposed amendments nor CITY's proposed conditions or modifications will become effective). Any amendment to the Development Plan shall require an amendment to this Development Agreement in accordance with Government Code Section 65868. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties specifically acknowledge that a minor deviation or change to the Development Plan which qualifies as substantial conformance pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.8 of the Development Plan shall not be considered an amendment to the Development Plan. (m) Other Governmental Permits. Provided that OWNER pays the reasonable cost of such cooperation, CITY shall reasonably cooperate with OWNER in its efforts to obtain such additional permits and approvals by any other governmental or quasi -governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Property, as long as such permits and approvals are consistent with this Agreement and with applicable regulatory requirements. CITY does not warrant or represent that any other governmental or quasi -governmental permits or approvals will be granted. (n) Further Miti ag tion. In connection with the issuance of any future Development Approvals that are subject to review under CEQA, CITY shall not impose any Project alternatives or mitigation measures beyond those referenced in the Existing Development Approvals unless determined to be necessary or appropriate to comply with CITY CEQA obligations relating to future Discretionary Actions. The mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring plan set forth in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and FEIR certified by CITY constitute additional benefits anticipated under this Agreement. Those mitigation measures will be enforced and monitored in the manner set forth in the Project Approvals. 17 61463025A 1041 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (o) Water Sgpply. Water supply for the Project has been the subject of the analysis required by Government Code Section 66473.7, Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10631, et seq., and the reservoirs, pump stations and other facilities related to the provision of water to the Project are further described in the Development Plan. (p) Vested Rights. During the term of this Agreement, OWNER is provided and assured the vested right to the maximum extent allowed under this Agreement to carry out the Development and use of the Property in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations as provided in this Section 4.1. (1) Project Entitlements/Density: OWNER is hereby granted the vested right to Development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement including, but not limited to, Existing Land Use Regulations and the Development Agreement Act. (2) Enforcement: Except to the extent this Agreement has been amended, modified, suspended or terminated in accordance with its terms, this Agreement shall be enforceable by either Party notwithstanding any change in any Applicable Rules. 4.2 Development of the Project, Planned Development OWNER shall construct the Project on the Site as a "planned development" as defined in California Civil Code Section 4175 (or successor provision) pursuant to the Davis -Stirling Act, which, among other requirements, shall require the recording by OWNER of a declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions that, at a minimum, meets the requirements of a "declaration" as defined and described in the Davis -Stirling Act and to memorialize specified conditions of approval that are part of the Project Approvals (the "CC&Rs"). OWNER shall provide to City, no less than ninety (90) days prior to the anticipated date of recording, a copy of the propose final draft of the CC&Rs for review and approval, not to be unreasonably withheld, by the City Manager and City Attorney. The Project shall have an "association" as defined and described in the Davis -Stirling Act. OWNER shall construct the Project on the Site only in accordance with the Project Approvals. As depicted in the Project Approvals, as the same may be updated or amended from time to time consistent with the terms hereof, the Project shall consist of a residential single-family development specifically developed and available for residential purposes, and may be the residents' primary residences or secondary residences, and/or may be used for short-term vacation rentals, with the following components: (a) Annual permitting fees to be consistent with the City's fee program; (b) Any rental or occupancy of thirty (30) nights or less to be subject to the City's then -current transient occupancy tax (TOT) for short-term vacation rentals; (c) Rental or occupancy agreements, and material renter or occupant information, shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years (or other retention period as maybe approved by City policy or code) by the OWNER or OWNER's authorized management company for the short-term vacation rentals at the Site; 61463025A 1042 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (d) Occupancy in any residence, including residences used as short- term vacation rentals, shall be capped at two (2) persons per bedroom, plus one (1) person; provided, however, that there may be an increase in occupancy allowances for permitted short- term vacation rentals as set forth in the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations in effect as of the date of the issued permit, or, if the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations (or relevant provisions regarding occupancy allowances) are repealed for any reason, then the occupancy allowances for permitted short-term vacation rentals shall be the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations most recently in effect prior to being repealed and shall remain applicable for the balance of the Term of this Agreement; and (e) All residences at the Site shall allow for transient occupancy, which means occupancy for thirty (30) days or less. 4.3 Limitations, Reservations and Exceptions. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section 4.1 hereinabove, in addition to the Existing Land Use Regulations, only the following laws and regulations hereafter shall apply to and govern the Development and use of the Property ("Reservations of Authority"): (a) Future Regulations. Future CITY Land Use Regulations that are not in conflict with the Applicable Rules or which, if in conflict with the Applicable Rules, have been consented to in writing by OWNER in connection with their application to the Development of the Property; (b) State and Federal Laws and Regulations. State and federal laws and regulations that conflict with the Applicable Rules or with OWNER'S vested rights set forth in this Agreement shall apply to the Development or use of the Property, together with any CITY ordinances, resolutions, regulations, and official policies necessary to enable CITY to comply with such overriding State and federal laws and regulations. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, (i) Landowner does not waive its right to challenge or contest the validity of any State, federal, or local laws, regulations or official policies; and (ii) in the event that any State or federal law or regulation prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, the Parties agree to consider in good faith amending or suspending such provisions of this Agreement as may be necessary to comply with such State or federal laws, provided that no Party shall be bound to approve any amendment to this Agreement unless this Agreement is amended in accordance with the procedures applicable to the adoption of development agreements as set forth in the Development Agreement Act and each Party retains full discretion with respect to such an approval. The City shall process any amendments required by this Section in a timely manner; (c) Public Health and Safety. Land Use Regulations that are adopted by CITY, which may be in conflict with the Applicable Rules, that are reasonably necessary in order to protect the public health and safety, so long as there is a reasonable relationship between the health and safety interest to be served by the adopted regulation and the nature and extent of the impairment of OWNER'S vested rights under this Agreement affected by said regulation. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, (i) Landowner does not waive its right to challenge or contest the validity of any such Land Use Regulation adopted by CITY; and (ii) in the event that any such Land Use Regulation (or City ordinance, resolution or official policy undertaken pursuant thereto) prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, the Parties agree to consider in good faith amending or suspending such provisions of this Agreement as may be necessary to comply with such Land Use Regulation, provided that 19 61463025A 1043 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT no Party shall be bound to approve any amendment to this Agreement unless this Agreement is amended in accordance with the procedures applicable to the adoption of development agreements as set forth in the Development Agreement Act and each Party retains full discretion with respect to such an approval. The City shall process any amendments required by this Section in a timely manner; (d) Buildingand nd Improvement Standards. Present and future Building and Improvement Standards, except that (taking into consideration the assurances to OWNER in this Section 4) any future amendment thereto that significantly reduces the amount of land within the Property that can be utilized for structures and improvements or significantly increases the amount of open space within the Project under the Development Plan shall not be considered a provision of any of the Building and Improvement Standards included within the exception provided by this Paragraph 4.2(d) and shall not apply to and govern the Development of the Project unless it complies with another exception under this Section 4.3; (e) Processing Fees and Charges. Subject to the provisions of Section 3.6 above, processing fees and charges imposed or required by CITY under current or future regulations covering the actual costs of CITY in (i) processing applications and requests for permits, approvals and other actions and (ii) monitoring compliance with any permits issued or approvals granted or the performance of any conditions with respect thereto or any performance required of OWNER hereunder; and, (f) Full Extent of Law. The Parties acknowledge and agree that CITY is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the foregoing limitations, reservations and exceptions are intended to reserve to CITY all of its police power that cannot be so limited. 4.4 Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reservations of Authority. (a) Adoption of General Plan Amendment and Development Plan: FEIR. In approving and adopting the Existing Development Approvals, CITY considered the health, safety and welfare of the existing and future residents and populations of the City and prepared in this regard the EIR and other environmental documentation, as well as an extensive traffic impact report and other studies. The Development Plan conforms in all respects to the development studied in and contemplated by the EIR, and this Agreement shall not authorize any development or project which was not studied in and contemplated by such EIR. (b) Acknowledgment Regarding Traffic, Future Traffic Policies and Traffic Level-_ (1) Incorporation of Project Traffic Generation in City Traffic Model and Traffic Study. The Parties acknowledge that the EIR contains a detailed transportation impact study that analyzes the future trips that will be generated by the Project ("Traffic Generation") and analyzes the extent to which such future Traffic Generation will affect the capacity of existing and planned future roads, freeways, freeway ramps, and intersections in the City and surrounding area ("Roadway Capacity Utilization"). CITY agrees that it will incorporate this Traffic Generation based on the trip generation rates in the EIR transportation impact analysis and Roadway Capacity Utilization based on maximum buildout under the Development Plan as part of CITY's next traffic and transportation model update, and that CITY will include these same assumptions in future traffic and transportation studies that CITY or any other private development project under CITY's jurisdiction may prepare regarding future development or roadway planning 20 61463025A 1044 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT projects until all residential units authorized by the Existing Development Approvals have been constructed or this Agreement terminates, whichever comes first. (2) Incorporation of EIR Traffic and Transportation Assumptions in Future Plans and Studies. CITY agrees that OWNER has, through the construction of the traffic and transportation improvements specified in the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted in conjunction with the Development Plan, satisfied the requirements of the Existing Land Use Regulations pertaining to the Specific Plan's Traffic Generation, as specifically noted in the EIR certified by CITY and the findings adopted by CITY. CITY also agrees that in conjunction with CITY's approval of future discretionary Subsequent Development Approvals, CITY shall not require OWNER to provide, construct, fully fund or fair -share fund additional roadway right-of-way, capacity or improvements beyond those required in the FEIR and this Agreement so long as OWNER implements the Development Plan without substantial change and within the scope of the assumptions and development schedule identified in the FEIR and the FEIR traffic study. (3) CEQA; Changes in Project and Mitigation Requirements. The Parties acknowledge that CEQA may require additional environmental review for discretionary Subsequent Development Approvals. Further, CEQA may require additional mitigation to the extent that new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects occur as a result of significant new information or substantial changes in the Project or the circumstances surrounding the Project. (California Public Resources Code §21166; CEQA Guidelines 15162 and 15183). Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2) of this Section, OWNER shall be responsible for additional mitigation that may be required pursuant to CEQA to reduce significant impacts that result from substantial changes to the Development Plan requested by OWNER that require major revisions to the EIR, pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21166 and CEQA Guidelines 15162. CITY and OWNER may at any time mutually agree on changes to the mitigation requirements or project design features without amending this Agreement subject to compliance with the requirements of CEQA. 4.5 Regulation by other Public Agencies. The Parties acknowledge that (a) other public agencies not within the control of CITY possess authority to regulate aspects of the Development of the Property separately from or jointly with CITY and (b) this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 5. PERIODIC REVIEWS. 5.1 Annual Review. During the Term of this Agreement, at least once every twelve (12) month period from the Effective Date of this Agreement, CITY shall review the good faith compliance of OWNER with the terms of this Agreement ("Annual Review"). 5.2 Standards for Annual Review. During the Annual Review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good -faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement by submitting a performance report, if such report is requested by CITY. If CITY finds and determines in good faith that OWNER has not materially complied with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, then CITY may declare a default by OWNER in accordance with this Agreement. CITY may exercise its rights and remedies relating 21 61463025A 1045 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT to any such event of default only after the period for curing a default as set forth in Section 11.2 has expired without cure of the default. 5.3 Certificate of Compliance. With respect to each year in which CITY approves OWNER's compliance with this Agreement, CITY shall, within thirty (30) days of receipt of written request from OWNER, provide OWNER with a written certificate of compliance stating that OWNER is in compliance with this Agreement. 6. SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS/TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and this Article 6, any owner of a separate legal residential lot on the Property within the Site and Project, and on which that separate legal residential lot has a residential dwelling, shall have a vested right to use the residential dwelling on that separate legal residential lot as a short-term vacation rental for the Term of this Agreement. All short-term vacation rentals shall be subject to the following: 6.1 Definition. As used in this Agreement, the term "short-term vacation rental" shall mean and refer to a "short-term vacation rental unit" as that term is defined in Section 3.25.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (or successor provision). 6.2 Short -Term Vacation Rental Use. Except as modified by this Article 6, all short-term vacation rentals shall comply with the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations for the duration of the Term of this Agreement, including but not limited to the penalties for violations. All short-term vacation rentals developed on the Property and within the Site and Project shall be permitted in accordance with the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations. No residential dwelling developed on the Property and within the Site and Project may be used for short-term vacation rental purposes unless the residential dwelling has a valid short-term vacation rental permit. If the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations (or any provisions therein) are repealed for any reason, then the Short -Term Vacation Rental Regulations (or applicable repealed provisions therein) that were most recently in effect prior to being repealed shall govern and shall remain applicable for the balance of the Term of this Agreement. For reference purposes only, Chapter 3.25 of the La Quinta Municipal Code as it exists as of the Effective Date is attached as Exhibit G. 6.3 Short-term vacation rental uses are subject to all provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code, including without limitation the City's noise compliance provisions set forth in Sections 9.100.210 and 11.08.040 (or successor provisions) of the La Quinta Municipal Code, and the transient occupancy tax (TOT) provisions set forth in Chapter 3.24 (or successor chapter of provisions) of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 6.4 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. OWNER shall execute and record or cause to be recorded in the Recorder's Office, against the Property and each separate legal residential parcel subdivided pursuant to Tentative Map 37387 and any Future Tract Maps, a declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (in a form approved by the City Manager and City Attorney prior to its recording), which shall run with the land, and shall be binding upon, 22 61463025A 1046 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT and place on notice, any and all owners of the separate legal residential lots of the requirements set forth in this Article 6. The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall expressly provide that short-term vacation rentals are an allowed use for every residential dwelling within the Site and Project (i.e., within the homeowner's association subject to the declaration). The requirements of this Section 6.4 may be satisfied by including the terms and conditions required herein in the CC&Rs required to be recorded pursuant to Section 4.2 of this Agreement. 7. TRANSFERS AND ASSIGNMENTS; TERMINATION UPON LOT SALE. 7.1 Transfer and Assignments of Rights and Interests. (a) Rights and Interests Appurtenant. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the rights and interests conveyed and provided herein to OWNER benefit and are appurtenant to the Property. OWNER has the right to sell, assign and transfer any and all of its rights and interests and to delegate any and all of its duties and obligations hereunder; provided, however, that such rights and interests may not be transferred or assigned except in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (1) Said rights and interests may be transferred or assigned only together with and as an incident of the transfer and assignment of the portions of the Property to which they relate, including any transfer or assignment pursuant to any foreclosure of a Mortgage or a deed in lieu of such foreclosure; and (2) Concurrent with any such assignment or transfer of rights and interests or within five (5) business days thereafter, OWNER shall notify CITY in writing of such assignment or transfer, the portions of the Property to which the assignment or transfer is appurtenant, and the name and address (for purposes of notices hereunder) of the transferee or assignee, together with the corresponding number of dwelling units that are included within such transfer, and OWNER and the assignee or transferee shall notify CITY whether the assignee or transferee has assumed any of OWNER's Obligations under this Agreement and if so, which of OWNER's obligations have been assumed. Any attempt to assign or transfer any right or interest in this Agreement except in strict compliance with this Section 7, shall be null and void and of no force and effect. (b) Subject to Terms of Agreement. Following any such assignment or transfer of any of the rights and interests of OWNER under this Agreement, the exercise, use and enjoyment thereof shall continue to be subject to the terms of this Agreement to the same extent as if the assignee or transferee were OWNER. The assignee or transferee of any of the rights and interests of OWNER shall take said rights and interests subject to this Agreement and shall perform the duties and obligations of OWNER. (c) Assignment and Assumption of OWNER's Obligations. In connection with a transfer or assignment of rights and interests pursuant to Section 7.1(a) above, OWNER may enter into a written agreement with the transferee regarding the respective rights and obligations of OWNER and the transferee under this Agreement, including without limitation, provisions that purport to release OWNER from specified rights and obligations under this Agreement that relate to the transferred Property, provided that the transferee expressly assumes all such rights and obligations. OWNER shall have the right but not the obligation to deliver to CITY a fully executed Assignment and Assumption Agreement between OWNER and the transferee pursuant to which OWNER shall assign and delegate to the transferee, and the transferee shall accept, assume and agree to perform all of the OWNER's Obligations under this 23 61463025A 1047 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Agreement that are allocable to the transferred Property (the "Assignment and Assumption Agreement"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, OWNER shall not be released from OWNER's Obligations unless and until CITY consents in writing to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed as provided in Subsection (d) below. If OWNER fails to seek CITY's consent or CITY fails to consent to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement in the manner set forth in Subsection (d) below, then OWNER may nevertheless transfer to the transferee any and all rights and obligations relating to the transferred Property arising under this Agreement; however, with respect to CITY, OWNER shall not be released with respect to such OWNER's Obligations. In the event CITY unreasonably withholds, conditions or delays any consent to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, as prohibited by Subsection (d) below, then OWNER may nevertheless transfer to the transferee any and all rights and obligations relating to the transferred Property arising under this Agreement and, with respect to CITY, OWNER shall be released with respect to such OWNER's Obligations. (d) Release of OWNER. Except to the extent OWNER is in default under this Agreement prior to the transfer, then CITY will review and consider promptly any request by OWNER for CITY's consent to an Assignment and Assumption Agreement. Upon the written consent of CITY to the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, OWNER shall be relieved of its legal duty to perform the assigned obligations of this Agreement set forth in such assumption. The withholding of CITY's consent to any such Assignment and Assumption Agreement shall be deemed reasonable only if, in light of the proposed transferee's reputation, experience and financial resources, such transferee would not in CITY's reasonable opinion be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee. CITY's consent to any such Assignment and Assumption Agreement shall be deemed unreasonably conditioned under circumstances where CITY seeks to impose conditions, standards or requirements on the transferee that are more stringent than what has been imposed on OWNER under this Agreement. CITY's consent to any such Assignment and Assumption Agreement shall be deemed unreasonably delayed under circumstances where CITY does not provide its consent within [ten (10)] business days after receipt of the Assignment and Assumption Agreement. (e) Effect of Noncompliance. From and after the CITY's consent to the assumption of obligations under this Agreement by a transferee pursuant to this Section, noncompliance by any such transferee with the assumed terms and conditions of this Agreement shall entitle CITY to pursue any and all of its rights under this Agreement against such transferee; but, such noncompliance shall not be deemed a default or grounds for termination hereof with respect to, or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against, other persons then owning or holding interests in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. Similarly, noncompliance by OWNER with respect to any terms and conditions of this Agreement not assumed by such transferee shall entitle CITY to pursue against OWNER any and all of CITY's rights under this Agreement as to obligations retained by OWNER, but such noncompliance by OWNER shall not be deemed a default or grounds for termination hereof with respect to, or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against, such transferee or other persons then owning or holding interests in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. (f) Rights of Successors and Assigns. Any and all successors (including without limitation, those successors acquiring their interests in the Property and this Agreement by merger, consolidation, stock sale, pledge, corporate reorganization or other conveyance by business arrangement) and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement, to the extent acquired as part of the Property or permitted in this Section or both. 24 61463025A 1048 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 7.2 Termination of Agreement Upon Sale of Lots to Public. Notwithstanding any provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the provisions of this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any individual lot, and such lot shall be released from and shall no longer be subject to this Agreement (without the execution or recordation of any further document or the taking of any further action), upon satisfaction of all of the following conditions: (a) the lot has been finally subdivided and either sold to a member of the public or any other ultimate user, or individually leased for a period of one year or more, or (b) a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the building or buildings on the lot or a final inspection of the building(s) has been approved by the CITY authorizing occupancy thereof. The Parties shall cooperate, at no cost to the non -requesting Party, in executing in recordable form any document that either Party (including any successor to the title of OWNER in and to any of the said lots) may submit to confirm the termination of this Agreement as to any such lot. Even if all of the lots in the Project are sold, and this Agreement is terminated with respect to each of such lots, this Agreement shall remain in effect and be binding upon CITY and OWNER. 8. TERM OF AGREEMENT. 8.1 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and, except as set forth in Section 7.2, shall continue for thirty years thereafter up to and including , 205X, unless this Agreement is (a) terminated as provided in Sections 11 and 12.2, or (b) modified or cancelled by mutual written consent of the Parties as provided in Section 9. 8.2 Rights and Duties Following Termination (a) In General. Upon the termination of this Agreement, no Party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder except with respect to (i) any obligations required to have been performed prior to said termination, (ii) the indemnification provisions of Section 12, and (iii) any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement that has occurred prior to said termination. (b) Survival of Terms. In the event that this Agreement is terminated for any reason other than the default of OWNER, the rights and duties of the Parties shall be as set forth in Section 8.2(a), except that CITY acknowledges in connection with certain fee programs, OWNER may have participated financially in excess of OWNER's pro rata share in the cost of the Public Facilities, in which case CITY shall endeavor to cause other benefited undeveloped lands and owners thereof to be identified, and CITY shall, to the extent feasible, attempt to require such other landowners to reimburse to OWNER, through CITY, that portion of such costs incurred by OWNER in excess of its pro rata share (as reasonably determined by CITY) that has not been previously reimbursed by CITY or a Financing District. OWNER acknowledges that CITY may be limited in the manner in which it may collect or require such reimbursement and that CITY may be unable to cause OWNER to be reimbursed for such costs. 9. AMENDMENT OR MODIFICATION TO THIS AGREEMENT. Subject to the provisions of Section 11, except as expressly stated to the contrary herein, this Agreement may be amended or cancelled only by the mutual written consent of the Parties consistent with Government Code Section 65867-65868, the Development Agreement Ordinance, and the following terms: 25 61463025A 1049 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (a) Insubstantial Modifications. The Parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor changes are appropriate with respect to the details of the Project development and the performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Project development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement, and thus desire to provide a streamlined method of approving insubstantial modifications to this Agreement. Therefore, any minor modification to this Agreement which does not modify (i) the Term of this Agreement; (ii) permitted uses of the Site, (iii) maximum density or intensity of use, except as specifically allowed in the Specific Plan, (iv) provisions for the reservation or dedication of land, (v) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent Discretionary Actions, or (vi) monetary obligations of OWNER (hereinafter an "Insubstantial Modification"), and that can be processed under CEQA as exempt from CEQA, or with the preparation of an Addendum to the EIR, shall not require a public hearing prior to the parties executing a modification to this Agreement. Either Party may propose an Insubstantial Modification, consent to which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed by the other Parry. Consent shall be deemed unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed where the other Party does not provide its consent within [twenty (20)] business days. Upon the written request of OWNER for a modification to this Agreement, the CITY Manager or designee shall determine, in the CITY Manager's sole discretion but not to be unreasonably withheld: (1) whether the requested modification constitutes an "Insubstantial Modification," as defined herein; (2) whether the requested modification is consistent with Applicable Rules (other than that portion of this Agreement sought to be modified); and (3) whether the requested modification tends to promote the goals of this Agreement. If the CITY Manager or designee determines that the requested modification is an "Insubstantial Modification" that is consistent with Applicable Rules and tends to promote the goals of this Agreement, the proposed modification will be approved by the CITY as an Insubstantial Modification, and a written modification will be executed by the Parties and attached to this Agreement. Any such Insubstantial Modification shall not be deemed an "amendment" to this Agreement under Government Code Section 65858. Substantial Amendments. Except as otherwise described in Section 9(a) of this Agreement, amendments to this Agreement shall be "Substantial Amendments" which require notice and a public hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868 (b) Incorporation of Insubstantial Modifications into Agreement. City approval of (1) Insubstantial Modifications to a Project Approval, as defined in Section 9 of this Agreement, in conformity with Applicable Rules and this Agreement, shall not require a modification or amendment to this Agreement and shall automatically be deemed to be incorporated into the Project and vested under this Agreement. Likewise, City approval of any Insubstantial Modification to any Exhibit to this Agreement shall not require a modification or amendment to this Agreement and shall automatically be deemed to be incorporated into this Agreement and vested hereunder. 26 61463025A 1050 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (c) Parties Required to Amend. Where a portion of OWNER's rights or obligations have been transferred, assigned, and assumed pursuant to Section 7 of this Agreement, the signature of the person or entity to whom such rights or obligations have been assigned shall not be required to amend this Agreement unless such amendment would materially alter the rights or obligations of such assignee/transferee hereunder. In no event shall the signature or consent of any Non -Assuming Transferee be required to amend this Agreement. 10. PROCESSING OF REQUESTS AND APPLICATIONS. Upon completion by OWNER of all required preliminary actions and payment of processing fees, if any, CITY shall proceed to process and check all applications for the Development of the Project within the times set forth in the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 et seq.), the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.), and other applicable provisions of law, as the same may be amended from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as provided in Section 4, no subsequently adopted Land Use Regulation (including, without limitation, any moratorium or other phasing of development) shall be applicable to and shall delay the acceptance or processing of any such application except in strict accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations or Land Use Regulations adopted by CITY pursuant to the Reservations of Authority. As provided above, the standards applied in approving or disapproving such applications shall be as set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, subject to the Reservations of Authority. 11. DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES. Unless canceled as provided herein, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section, this Agreement is enforceable according to its terms by either Parry hereto. 11.1 Remedies in General. (a) The Parties acknowledge that CITY would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in monetary damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. (b) In general, each of the Parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement; except that CITY shall not be liable for monetary damages to OWNER, or to any assignee, transferee of OWNER or any other person, and OWNER covenants not to sue CITY for monetary damages, or claim any monetary damages against CITY, for: (1) any breach of, or which arises out of, this Agreement; (2) the taking, impairment or restriction of any right or interest conveyed or provided hereunder or pursuant hereto; or 27 61463025A 1051 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT (3) damages arising out of or connected with any dispute, controversy or issue regarding the application or interpretation or effect of the provisions of this Agreement. (c) Notwithstanding the above, however, the foregoing does not limit the liability of CITY, if any, for damages which: (1) are not for a breach of this Agreement or which do not arise under this Agreement; (2) are not with respect to any right or interest conveyed or provided hereunder or pursuant hereto, (3) relate to the cost of additional mitigation measures, conditions, requirements or other obligations (in addition to those provided for in the Development Plan) imposed on the Property in violation of this Agreement, and (4) do not arise out of or which are not connected with any dispute, controversy or issue regarding the application, interpretation or effect of the provisions of this Agreement to, on or the application of, any Land Use Regulation of CITY. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, and as an example, in the event that CITY refuses to issue building permits under and in accordance with a Vesting Tentative Map issued by CITY, OWNER would be entitled to whatever remedies at law or in equity which are available, including, if available under law, the right to monetary damages. 11.2 Termination of Agreement for Default by OWNER. CITY may terminate this Agreement by written notice to OWNER for any failure of OWNER to perform any material duty or obligation of OWNER under, or to comply in good faith with the terms and conditions of, this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "default"); provided however, CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section only after providing written notice to OWNER of the default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by OWNER to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, OWNER has failed to take such actions and cure such default within sixty (60) days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60-day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence within such 60-day period the actions necessary to bring itself into compliance and to pursue diligently such steps to completion. 11.3 Termination of Agreement for Default by CITY. OWNER may terminate this Agreement by written notice to CITY for any default by CITY under this Agreement after written notice to CITY advising of the nature of default by CITY and, where the default can be cured, CITY has failed to take such actions and cure such default within sixty (60) days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60-day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence within such 60-day period the actions necessary to bring itself into compliance and to pursue diligently such steps to completion. 11.4 Termination by OWNER Prior to Bond Sale. Provided that OWNER is not in material default under this Agreement and notwithstanding any provisions in this Agreement to the contrary, OWNER shall have the right to terminate this W. 61463025A 1052 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Agreement by providing written notice to CITY in the event that OWNER reasonably determines, prior to the first sale of bonds by any Financing District formed by CITY after Request by OWNER pursuant to Section 3.2 of this Agreement, that Development of the Project will not meet the Economic Expectations of OWNER and/or has become economically infeasible due to changed market conditions, increased Development costs, conditions to future discretionary approvals imposed by governmental entities, or similar factors. In the event of any such termination by OWNER, OWNER acknowledges that CITY may, in its discretion, restore the General Plan and zoning regulations of the Property to the condition that existed prior to the adoption of the Development Approvals. 11.5 Specific Performance. The Parties acknowledge that monetary damages and remedies at law generally are inadequate due, in part, to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun and specific performance is a particularly appropriate remedy for the enforcement of this Agreement and should be available to both Parties based on the following reasons and facts: (a) the unavailability of monetary damages against CITY provided in Section 11.1 above; (b) OWNER's Obligations provided for in this Agreement were bargained for by CITY and given in return for assurances by CITY to OWNER regarding the Existing Land Use Regulations (except as specified to the contrary herein) applicable to the Development of the Property, which assurances were in turn relied upon by OWNER in undertaking OWNER's Obligations; (c) Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it may not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun; after such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property, or portions thereof, and to provide other benefits to CITY. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sums of money that would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts; (d) The inability of OWNER to recover and receive back its capital investment in the Public Facilities to be provided to CITY as part of OWNER's Obligations and to re -plan and provide for different uses of the Property once such facilities and infrastructure have been completed; and, (e) The use of the Property for the purposes and uses described in the Development Plan is unique. Further, the Parties acknowledge that for the reasons set forth above (particularly because of the lack of monetary damages available to OWNER), in connection with any judicial proceeding regarding the performance of this Agreement, rights, or the interests and duties of the Parties hereunder, it is appropriate for, and the Parties shall cooperate in requesting (whether by stipulations or otherwise) the court to proceed expeditiously and to retain jurisdiction until the underlying conflict or dispute has been fully resolved. 29 61463025A 1053 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 11.6 Appointment of Referee. A Party initiating legal action hereunder may request that such action be heard by a referee appointed by the Riverside County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 638 et seq. OWNER and CITY, in such case, shall use their best efforts to agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. The referee shall be a retired judge from either the California Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal, the California Supreme Court, the United States District Court or the United States Court of Appeals with significant and recent experience in resolving land use and real property disputes. If OWNER, and CITY are unable to agree upon a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by any Party, any Party may seek to have a referee appointed pursuant to Section 640 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. The cost and fees of such proceeding including the referee's fees and the court reporter's fees (exclusive of the attorney's fees and cost of the Parties) shall be borne equally by the Parties; provided, however, that the costs and fees for such proceeding, including any initiation fee, shall be ultimately borne in accordance with Section 15.9 below. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. The statement of decision of the referee shall be binding upon the parties, and upon filing of the statement of decision with the clerk of the court (or with the judge where there is no clerk), judgment may be entered thereon in the same manner as if the action had been tried by the court. The decision of the referee shall be appealable as if rendered by the court. In the event that an alternative method of resolving disputes concerning the application, enforcement or interpretation of development agreements is provided by legislative or judicial action after the Effective Date, the Parties may, by mutual agreement, select such alternative method. 11.7 Estoppel Certificates. Either Party may at any time deliver written notice to the other Party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: (a) The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the Parties; (b) The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments; (c) That there has been no default in the performance of the requesting Parry's obligations under the Agreement or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A Party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting Party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The Director of CITY's Planning Division or its designee may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees, transferees and mortgagees of OWNER. In the event that one Party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting Party shall reimburse the other Party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such Party with respect thereto, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 30 61463025A 1054 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 12. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION. 12.1 Indemnification. OWNER shall indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless CITY, its agents, elected officials, officers, employees and independent consultants from and against any third party claim, cause of action, administrative or judicial proceeding or enforcement action of any kind ("Third Party Claim") and all costs and expenses incurred therewith subject to the limitations of this Section 12, that (a) alleges or results in any loss, liability, damage, compensation, fine, penalty, order, judgment, remedial action or requirement arising from the acts, omissions or operations of OWNER or OWNER's agents, contractors, subcontractors and employees pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to the failure or alleged failure to pay prevailing wages for any Public Works constructed by or under the direction of OWNER or OWNER's contractors and/or subcontractors pursuant to Section 3.3(c) above; or (b) seeks to attack, challenge, set aside, void, or annul the certification of the EIR, this Agreement of the ordinance approving this Agreement, the Development Approvals, the formation of the CFD or issuance of bonds thereunder, the dedication or conveyance of Potential Public Properties or Public Facilities pursuant to this Agreement, or any Subsequent Development Approvals. Notwithstanding the above, OWNER's obligations under the preceding sentence shall not apply to Third Party Claims arising solely from (i) the intentional wrongful acts or willful misconduct of CITY or (ii) CITY's breach of its obligations under this Agreement. With regard to alleged or actual failure to pay prevailing wages, OWNER, in giving this indemnification, acknowledges the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1781 and specifically waives any protection, rights or claims against CITY that may accrue to OWNER pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1781. Nothing in this Section 12.1 shall be construed to relieve contractors or subcontractors of OWNER from their respective obligations to comply with applicable prevailing wage and labor laws. 12.2 Option to Terminate. If, within the time periods for the filing of lawsuits under CEQA, the State Planning and Zoning Law, or other applicable state or federal laws, a Third Party Claim is filed challenging (i) the Existing Development Approvals, (ii) the terms of this Agreement, (iii) the ordinance approving this Agreement, (iv) the formation of the CFD, (v) the first issuance of bonds, or (vi) any matter related to a sale, dedication or conveyance of any Potential Public Properties or Public Facilities which sale, dedication or conveyance occurs within the same approximate time period as the first sale of bonds by a Financing District formed pursuant to Section 3.2, then the Parties shall meet and confer concerning the potential impact of the Third Party Claim on this Agreement and the Development of the Project. Within thirty (30) days of such meeting, if OWNER determines that such Third Party Claim may have an unacceptable adverse impact on the Project, OWNER's rights under this Agreement, or its reasonable investment -based Economic Expectations in connection with the Project, OWNER may in its discretion terminate this Agreement by sending CITY a written notice of such termination, and the Parties shall thereafter be relieved of any further obligations under this Agreement. OWNER acknowledges that if this Agreement is terminated, CITY shall have no obligation to defend against such Third Party Claim and, at CITY's discretion, may restore the General Plan and zoning regulations of the Property to the condition that existed prior to the adoption of the Development Approvals. If OWNER terminates this Agreement pursuant to this Section 12.2, OWNER shall undertake all actions as are reasonable or necessary in order to have the Third Party Claim dismissed and, (a) to the extent that CITY incurs any costs or attorneys' fees in assisting OWNER in having the Third Parry Claim dismissed, or (b) if OWNER fails to have such claim dismissed and CITY incurs any costs or attorneys' fees in having such claim dismissed, OWNER shall be responsible for all reasonable legal expenses of CITY, including court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by CITY in so doing. 31 61463025A 1055 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 12.3 Defense of Third -Party Claims. In the event of a Third -Party Claim, and if OWNER does not elect to terminate this Agreement pursuant to its rights under Section 11.3, OWNER shall defend CITY against the Third -Party Claim at OWNER's expense with legal counsel reasonably approved by CITY; provided, however, that CITY may, in its discretion and upon notice to OWNER, select the legal counsel if OWNER is in default under this Agreement. With respect to any Third -Party Claim, if OWNER asks CITY to participate in the defense of that Third Party Claim, CITY shall participate and fully cooperate in a timely manner in the defense of said Third Party Claim. Even if not requested to do so, CITY may elect to participate in the defense of any Third -Party Claim. In either circumstance, CITY may select legal counsel reasonably approved by OWNER to represent CITY in the defense of such Third -party Claim and OWNER shall reimburse CITY for the reasonable cost of that defense. 12.4 Cooperation and Cost Control. Within five (5) business days after receiving or being notified of a Third -Party Claim, CITY shall notify OWNER of same. The Parties shall, in timely manner, fully cooperate with each other and their respective counsel (if CITY has retained counsel pursuant to Section 12.2 or 12.3 above) in defending against any Third -Party Claim, including the preparation of any applicable administrative record, the coordination of pleadings and briefs filed in the course of litigation, and the control of costs, expenses, and fees incurred in defending against the Third -Party Claim. Among other reasonable means of controlling litigation costs, expenses and fees, in any action involving a Third -Party Claim for which OWNER is indemnifying CITY and is not in default under this Agreement, counsel for OWNER may be deemed lead counsel and counsel for CITY (if CITY has retained counsel pursuant to Section 12.2 or 12.3 above) shall make a good faith effort to avoid duplication of legal services and of other costs and expenses. The Parties shall cooperate in the preparation of any required administrative record in a reasonable and cost- effective manner and shall consult with each other in good faith to ensure that unnecessary costs are not incurred in defending against a Third -Party Claim. So long as OWNER is not in default under this Agreement, CITY shall not enter into a settlement agreement as to any Third -Party Claim or otherwise compromise the defense of same without OWNER's written consent. OWNER shall also have the right to settle any such Third Party Claim, provided that OWNER may not settle such claim on terms that would reduce any of CITY's rights under this Agreement or constitute an amendment or modification of this Agreement, the Existing Land Use Regulations, or the Development Plan unless such amendment or modification is approved in advance by CITY in accordance with applicable legal requirements, and CITY reserves its full legislative discretion with respect to making such an approval. 12.5 No Recourse for Inabilitv to Perform Due to Judicial Determinations. CITY shall have no liability for general, special, or compensatory damages to OWNER, nor may the performance of CITY be compelled by OWNER (or any successor or assignee or transferee of OWNER) for any failure of CITY to perform under this Agreement, or for the inability of OWNER to develop the Property as contemplated by the Development Plan, which failure to perform or inability to develop is the result of a judicial determination that the General Plan, the Existing Development Approvals, or any Subsequent Development Approvals are invalid or inadequate or not in compliance with law, or that this Agreement or any of CITY's actions in adopting it were invalid, inadequate, or not in compliance with law. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12.5, OWNER shall have the right to obtain a refund or return of any deposit made with CITY or fees paid to CITY in connection with the Development of the Project or other payments made under this Agreement to the extent that such deposit or fees or other 32 61463025A 1056 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT payments have not been used by CITY in connection with its review or other actions related to the Project. 13. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ON TITLE. 13.1 Covenants Run With the Land. (a) Subject to the provisions of Sections 7 and 14: (1) All of the provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, consolidation, or otherwise) and assigns, devisees, administrators, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring any rights or interests in the Property, or any portion thereof, whether by operation of laws or in any manner whatsoever and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, consolidation or otherwise) and assigns; (2) All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law; (3) Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act on the Property hereunder (A) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property, (B) runs with the Property and every portion thereof, and (C) is binding upon each Party and each successive owner during its ownership of all or any portion of the Property, and each person having any interest therein derived in any manner through any owner of the Property, or any portion thereof, and shall benefit each Party and the Property hereunder, and each other person succeeding to an interest in all or any portion of the Property. (b) Notwithstanding any of the foregoing or in this Agreement to the contrary, any assignee or transferee or Mortgagee which acquires any right or interest in or with respect to the Property or any portion thereof shall take and hold such rights and interests subject to this Agreement and shall not have been deemed to have assumed the OWNER'S Obligations or the other affirmative duties and obligations of OWNER hereunder except: (1) To the extent that any of such assignees, transferees or Mortgagees have expressly assumed any of the duties or obligations of OWNER hereunder; (2) If any such assignee, transferee or Mortgagee accepts, holds, or attempts to exercise or enjoy the rights or interests of OWNER hereunder, it shall have assumed the obligations of OWNER under Sections 3 and 11; and (3) To the extent that the performance of any duty or obligation by OWNER is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by CITY, it shall continue to be a condition to performance by CITY hereunder. 13.2 No Dedication or Lien. Nothing herein shall be construed as a dedication or transfer of any right or interest in, or as creating a lien with respect to, the title to the Property. 33 61463025A 1057 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 13.3 Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Every person who now or hereafter owns or acquires any right, title or interest in or to any portion of the Project or the Property is and shall be conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to every provision contained herein, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the Project or the Property. 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS OF CURE. 14.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof, including the lien of any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, and any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in or with respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, by a Mortgagee (whether under or pursuant to a Mortgage, foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise), shall be subject to all of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. 14.2 Mortgagee Not Obli _ ag ted. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform OWNER's Obligations or other affirmative covenants of OWNER hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; except that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by OWNER is a condition to the performance of a covenant by CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to CITY's performance hereunder. 14.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure. If CITY receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given OWNER hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, and records a copy of each request in the Official Records of Riverside County in the manner required under Civil Code Section 2924(b) with respect to Requests for Notices of Default ("Notice of Default"), then CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to OWNER, any notice given to OWNER with respect to any claim by CITY that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms of this Agreement or has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right (but not the obligation) to cure or remedy the claim of default or noncompliance set forth in CITY's notice during the remaining cure period allowed OWNER pursuant to Section 11.2 of this Agreement; provided however that in the event that CITY does not deliver the Notice of Default to Mortgagee at the same time as such notice is delivered to OWNER, Mortgagee shall have the same cure rights as OWNER pursuant to Section 11.2 for the full cure period beginning upon the delivery of the Notice of Default to the Mortgagee. If the default is of a nature that can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall seek to obtain possession with diligence and continuity through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure the default or noncompliance within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession. If any such default or noncompliance cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default or noncompliance if such Mortgagee commences cure during such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such cure. 34 61463025A 1058 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 14.4 Bankruptcy. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Section 14, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving OWNER, the times specified in Section 14.3 for commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition, provided that such Mortgagee is proceeding expeditiously to terminate such prohibition and in no event for a period longer than one year. 15. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 15.1 Recordation of Agreement. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereof shall be recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County by the Clerk of the City Council within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15.2 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement, unless and to the extent the rights and obligations of any Parry have been materially altered or abridged by such holding. Nothing contained in this Subsection shall be deemed to diminish OWNER'S right to terminate under Section 11 above. 15.3 Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by any Parry for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of Riverside County, or the United States District Court for the Central District of California, and the Parties waive all provisions of law providing for the removal or change of venue to any other court. 15.4 Section Headings. All Section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 15.5 Singular and Plural. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural. 15.6 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 35 61463025A 1059 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 15.7 Waiver. Failure by a Parry to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by any other Parry, or the failure by a Party to exercise its rights upon the default of another Parry, shall not constitute a waiver of such Party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other Party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 15.8 Force Majeure. No Party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond such Parry's control, government regulations or court actions (such as restraining orders or injunctions) beyond such Party's control. If any such events shall occur, the term of this Agreement and the time for performance by a Party of any of its obligations hereunder shall be extended by the period of time that such events prevented such performance, provided that the term of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years or for a period that would cause this Agreement or the provisions hereof to be void as violating the rule against perpetuities. 15.9 Attorneys' Fees. In any judicial proceeding, reference, mediation or other dispute resolution proceeding between the Parties seeking enforcement of any of the terms and provisions of this Agreement against the other Party, the prevailing Party in such proceeding shall recover all of its actual and reasonable costs and expenses, including but not limited to expert witness fees, attorneys' fees, costs of investigation and preparation prior to the administrative or judicial hearing, and its contribution for the costs of the referee as provided in Section 11.6. The right to recover such costs and expenses shall accrue upon commencement of the proceeding, regardless of whether the dispute is prosecuted to a final judgment or decision. 15.10 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the Party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited Party. 15.11 Conveyances. Conveyances of the Property or portions thereof required or permitted pursuant to the terms of this Agreement (including without limitation any open space or park lands to be conveyed to CITY), shall not include any mineral, oil, gas, hydrocarbon or other substances of every type and nature, in, under or on the Property excepted and reserved by and unto Hofmann Development Company under which OWNER acquired its ownership interest in the Property. 15.12 Relationship of Parties. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of agency, joint venture or partnership between them and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers, partners or agents of one another. 36 61463025A 1060 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 15.13 Notices. Any notice required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person to an officer of any Parry, or sent by Federal Express, private commercial delivery or courier service for next business day delivery, or may be deposited in the United States mail, duly certified or registered, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, and addressed to the other Party, as follows: If to CITY: City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Attn: City Administrator Fax: (760) 777-7 Phone: (760) 777-7000 with a copy to: Rutan & Tucker, LLP. 18575 Jamboree Road, 9th Floor Irvine, CA 92130 Attention: William H. Ihrke, Esq. bihrke@rutan.com If to OWNER: Travertine Land Company, LLC c/o Hofmann Land Development Company, LLC 1380 Galaxy Way Concord, CA 94520 Attn: Louis Miramontes Email: Lmiramontes@KHHtrust.com Phone: (925) 588-7388 with a copy to: TRG Land, LLC 893 Production Place Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attn: Mark Rogers Email: MRogers@TRGLand.com Phone: (949) 722-0634 with a copy to: Nossaman 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800 Irvine, CA 92612 Attn: Gregory W. Sanders, Esq. Fax: (949) 833-7878 Phone: (949) 833-7800 Notice may also be given by electronic mail ("E-mail") or facsimile transmission ("Fax") to any Party at the respective Fax number given above and marked "RUSH - PLEASE DELIVER IMMEDIATELY," provided receipt of such transmission shall be confirmed by follow-up notice within seventy-two (72) hours by another method authorized above. Any Party hereto may from time to time, by written notice to the other Parties as required herein, designate a different address that shall be substituted for the one above specified. Notice by any method shall be deemed served 37 61463025A 1061 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT or delivered only upon actual receipt at the address, E-mail address or Fax number listed above. Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given upon receipt or, if sent by United States mail as provided above, seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the United States mail or upon receipt. 15.14 Further Actions and Instruments. Each Party shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other Party to the extent necessary to implement this Agreement. Upon the request of a Party at any time, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary to implement this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. The Parties may, by mutual agreement, make such interpretations, clarifications, or minor modifications to the provisions of this Agreement as may be necessary to resolve ambiguities that may arise in the implementation of this Agreement without amending this Agreement so long as such additional or different requirements are consistent with the general intent and purpose of this Agreement. 15.15 Successors and Assigns. Subject to the provisions of Sections 7 and 14, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their successors and assigns. 15.16 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by the Parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if each of the Parties had executed the same instrument. 15.17 Authority to Execute. OWNER represents and warrants that: (a) it is duly organized and existing; (b) it is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement; (c) by so executing this Agreement, OWNER is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement; (d) OWNER's entry into and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement do not violate any provision of any other agreement to which OWNER is bound; and (e) there is no existing or threatened litigation or legal proceeding of which OWNER is aware that could prevent OWNER from entering into or performing its obligations set forth in this Agreement. 15.18 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with its exhibits, sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements that are not contained or expressly referred to herein and no testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. [Signature Page Attached] M. 61463025A 1062 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT [Signature Page to Development Agreement] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first set forth above. CITY: CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California municipal corporation By: City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney OWNER: TRAVERTINE LAND COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: 39 61463025A 1063 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF On , before me, , a Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 40 61463025 A 1064 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF On , before me, , a Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF On , before me, , a Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 41 61463025A 1065 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1: (APN'S: 766-110-003 AND 766-120-001) THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE THEREOF, 1452.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID WESTERLY LINE, 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES, 1452.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33, THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 BEARS NORTH 00 DEG 01' 00" WEST, 920.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG 26' 27" EAST 300 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEG 01' 00" EAST 400.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 29' 45" WEST 300.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 00 DEG 01' 00" WEST 400.00 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING NORTHERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33, DISTANT THEREON SOUTH 0 DEG 01' 00" EAST, 1320.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG 29' 45" EAST, 300.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION 33; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WESTERLY 30.00 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 2: (APN: 766-110-004) THE NORTH 3/5 OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTH 3/5 BEING PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; EXCEPT THE WESTERLY 300.00 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 3: (APN: 766-110-007) A-1 61463025A 1066 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT THE WEST 3/5TH OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 3/5 BEING PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY 100.00 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 400.00 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED HALF INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS AND HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NON-METALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON, OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID LANDS, WHICH INTEREST IS SO LIMITED, HOWEVER, THAT THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE NO RIGHT OF INGRESS, EGRESS OR REGRESS IN, OVER OR ACROSS, OR RIGHT TO DRILL, EXPLORE FOR, MINE OR REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS BY OPERATIONS ON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPLORE FOR, MINE AND REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY A DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY BY SLANT DRILLING, SHAFTS, TUNNELS, OR OTHER MEANS OR OPERATIONS ON OR FROM LAND OTHER THAN SAID LAND. PARCEL 3A: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT OVER, UNDER AND UPON EACH OF THE TWO STRIPS OF REAL PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT AND USE FOR ALL PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OF A ROAD AND OF WATER AND ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION PIPES, LINES AND ALL EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES, AND OTHER UTILITIES; SAID STRIPS OF REAL PROPERTY ARE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE WESTERLY 30.00 FEET AND THE SOUTHERLY 30.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY 30.00 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 4: (APN: 766-110-009) THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED HALF INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS AND HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NON-METALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON, OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID LANDS, WHICH INTEREST IS SO LIMITED, HOWEVER, THAT THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE NO RIGHT OF INGRESS, EGRESS OR REGRESS IN, OVER OR ACROSS, OR RIGHT TO DRILL, EXPLORE FOR, MINE OR REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS BY 2 61463025A 1067 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OPERATIONS ON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPLORE FOR, MINE AND REMOVE SAID OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AND MINERALS FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY A DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY BY SLANT DRILLING, SHAFTS, TUNNELS, OR OTHER MEANS OR OPERATIONS ON OR FROM LAND OTHER THAN SAID LAND. PARCEL 5: (APN: 766-120-002) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE THEREOF, 1452.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID WESTERLY LINE, 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES, 1452.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 6: (APN: 766-120-003) THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WESTERLY 300 FEET THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPTING AN UNDIVIDED THREE -SIXTHS (3/6) INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, AND ALL MINERALS, WHETHER METALLIC OR NONMETALLIC, IN, UNDER OR ON OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED, EXTRACTED OR REMOVED FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY. PARCEL 7: (APN: 766-120-015) THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE WEST 880 FEET OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. PARCEL 8: (APN: 753-050-007) THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. PARCEL 9: (APN: 753-040-017) THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. PARCEL 10: (APN: 753-040-014) THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, 3 61463025A 1068 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. PARCEL 11: (APN: 753-050-029) THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. PARCEL 12: (APN: 753-060-003) ALL OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 50' 58" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 4 A DISTANCE OF 2644.21 FEET TO THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 49' 39" EAST CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF SECTION 4 A DISTANCE OF 1091.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 DEG 08' 54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 301.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 26 DEG 40' 44" WEST A DISTANCE OF 583.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18 DEG 03' 05" WEST A DISTANCE OF 913.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62 DEG 19' 09" WEST A DISTANCE OF 523.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 55 DEG 53' 25" WEST A DISTANCE OF 545.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86 DEG 15' 16" WEST A DISTANCE OF 668.56 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEG 18' 58" WEST A DISTANCE OF 248.98 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47 DEG 47' 20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 285.54 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37 DEG 17' 03" WEST A DISTANCE OF 352.51 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG 55' 17" WEST A DISTANCE OF 268.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73 DEG 28' 11" WEST A DISTANCE OF 330.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44 DEG 46' 57" WEST A DISTANCE OF 235.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 280 57' 52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 399.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13 DEG 40' 56" WEST A DISTANCE OF 38.51 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEG 55' 20" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 999.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT FOR, MINE, AND REMOVE THE SAME, ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED JUNE 1, 1938 (52 STAT. 609), AS RESERVED IN THE PATENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 18, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 352836 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 13: (APN: 753-040-016) THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. 2 61463025A 1069 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXCEPTING THEREFROM 1/2 OF ALL MINERAL RIGHTS BY DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 12, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-265643 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 14: (APN'S: 766-120-006 AND 766-120-016) THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, AND THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, PER DOCUMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 12, 2008 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0597136, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 15: (APN: 766-120-018) BEING A PORTION OF PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 3 OF QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 2, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0152345, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL "A" COMMENCING AT THE CENTER -SOUTH ONE SIXTEEN CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTH 89046'28" EAST 880.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89046'28" EAST 121.48 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 0001 F0V EAST 660.95 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 SOUTH LINE SOUTH 89047' 10" WEST 121.48 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 0001l'OI" WEST 660.92 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 16: (APN: 766-120-021) BEING A PORTION OF PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 12, 2008 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0121018, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL "A" COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT REAL PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 2008-0121018, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EAST SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; 5 61463025A 1070 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT THENCE SOUTH 89"47' 10" WEST 129.91 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 89047' 10" WEST 224.62 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 802.00 FEET, A LINE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE AT SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 38°23'25" WEST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 360.07 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°43'25", A LINE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE AT SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 64006'50" EAST; THENCE SOUTH 00014'08" EAST 277.63 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 17: (APN: 766-120-023) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 2, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0152345, AS PARCEL 5, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE NORTH 00014'08" WEST 661.28 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PROPERTY, ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 89047'10" WEST 129.91 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 00014'08" WEST 661.25 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; THENCE NORTH 89046'28" EAST 129.92 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE SOUTH 00014'08" EAST 661.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 18: (APN: 764-280-057) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 10, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0113798, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; no 61463025A 1071 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT THENCE NORTH 89048'23" EAST 101.24 FEET ALONG CENTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTER SECTION LINE SOUTH 00°12'45" WEST 10.19 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20012'35" EAST 13.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00037'20" WEST 248.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01 ° 19'43" EAST 90.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00009'35" WEST 228.86 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02058'47" WEST 61.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01 °34'58" WEST 8.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE AS DESCRIBED WITHIN SAID GRANT DEED; THENCE SOUTH 89048'15" WEST 98.67 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF MADISON STREET, ALSO BEING THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH 00014'08" WEST 661.28 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 19: (APN'S: 764-280-059 AND 764-280-061) THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTIES AS DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEEDS RECORDED FEBRUARY 18, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 053692 AND 053694, BOTH OFFICIAL RECORDS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (S.B.M.), BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH 00014'08" WEST 30.00 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF MADISON STREET, ALSO BEING THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 34 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 00014'08" WEST 1953.83 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 053692; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 89048'15" EAST 98.67 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 01034'58" WEST 156.30 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00029'17" WEST 362.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°36'06" WEST 205.42 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00056'31" EAST 180.24 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00004' 19" EAST 631.61 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01 ° 10'49" WEST 168.30 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 03003'00" EAST 25.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00046' 14" WEST 176.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27028'20" EAST 54.03 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF AVENUE 62 AS DESCRIBED BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 17, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 32692, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; 7 61463025A 1072 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT THENCE SOUTH 89047'50" WEST 101.67 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 61463025A 1073 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT B SITE MAP . > Yhuiai�LL . EVNY �r I— aES RT ti a — �: -- r! ti•Li`�.1 '+'�u k5+k`i�E'St ,L'^�� y�r-s�� wRFF,``��,,' Wt4i IVY - .L '`•' + F4 ' C •. - 1�n • L� � r s� . I CAS F � j �5�, , I'll -il� • i k E I '{•.- "�' _ eM4? f_TFLUL^Vr5 55EDUN4 G5R7E �1: L]FH.i'vaui�.GA'M'J4rri-iFC�I4 KYGf'IF,S�Mf -_—_ tiMTo Fp(�1jT 3aYxS-1 iYJn-"k+,4 {r5�11.iTY Tc Ys Fl 61463025.0 1074 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT C EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS A. Existing Development Approvals: 1. Environmental Impact Report No. , certified by City Council Resolution No. _- State Clearinghouse Number 2018011023 2. General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2017-0002, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 3. Specific Plan No. SP 2017-0004, adopted by City Council Ordinance No. _- 4. Zone Change No. ZC 2017-0002, adopted by City Council Ordinance No. _- 6. Tentative Subdivision Tract Map No.37387 7. Final Subdivision Tract Map No. 8. Vesting Tentative Map. No. 9. Grading Permits 10. Building Permits B. Other Land Use Regulations: [below list is for illustrative purposes only at this time] 1. List Zoning Code sections applicable to the Property, including but not limited to the zoning regulations attached as Appendix 1 to Specific Plan No. SP 2017-0004 that permit the use of portions of the Property for the Operations and Servicing Activities for CVWD. 2. General Plan of the City of La Quinta 3. The La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code, Ordinance Nos. XX 4. The La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, adopted February 19, 2013 [Note: we need to determine how to best maintain copies of the above documents for future reference as mentioned in Section 1.2.18 of the Agreement.] 2 61463025A 1075 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT D DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC BENEFITS The public benefits to be received by CITY and its residents as a result of this Agreement include, without limitation, the following: 1. Fiscal Contributions A. Expansion of Real Property Tax Base and Resulting Revenues: Development of the Project is projected to increase the property tax base within the City by $630.7 million, and would generate nearly $6.0 million per year in new General Fund revenue for the City at full buildout of the project (and thereafter) (not including inflation and appreciation). Based on the Travertine Specific Plan ("TSP") as proposed and the July 27, 2023 Fiscal Impact Analysis, projected increased revenue sources to CITY in 2023 values include, but are not limited to: i. Increased Property Tax Revenues: Increased annual property taxes to the City of approximately $1.4 million (not including inflation and appreciation) at full buildout. ii. Construction Related Fee Revenue: The City will receive $X,XXX in revenues to pay for plan check, inspections and other building/infrastructure fees. iii. Transient Occupancy: The City will receive approximately $980,000 per year in transient occupancy taxes from TSP resort uses and approximately $2.2 million per year in transient occupancy taxes from TSP short-term rentals. iv. Positive Fiscal Impacts: While there are no anticipated deficits to the General Fund caused by the Project, should any project related deficit occur, such amounts will be reimbursed by OWNER pursuant to Paragraph 1.13 below and Section 3.6 of the Agreement. V. Net Positive Revenue Impact: Projected $2.0 million annual net positive impact to the City's revenues (at full buildout of the project, not including inflation and appreciation) B. Fire, Police and Emergency Services: OWNER will cause the following contributions for emergency services to CITY to be paid by OWNER or the Financing District: i. Development related public safety expenditures; OWNER will cause the difference to be paid into the CITY's general fund. If this fiscal impact to CITY's general fund caused by the Project occurs, it will be funded through payment of an annual development impact fee ("Impact Fee"). The Impact Fee may be paid either by the OWNER or through a public financing district. C. School Facilities Modernization: Pursuant to and at the times provided in separate agreements with the Coachella Valley Unified School District and the Desert Sands Unified School District (collectively, "Districts"), OWNER will pay school impact fees of approximately $4.79 / square foot (residential fee) for such staffing and/or expansion and modernization of school facilities as may be identified by the District and agreed to by OWNER. D. County LibrM Equipment: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential dwelling unit within the Project, OWNER will contribute to the County of Riverside Public Library. D-12 61463025A 1076 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT 2. Dedication/Preservation of Public Park. Trails and OUen Space A. Public Facilities: OWNER will convey 0.9 gross acres to CITY for use as a public facility (such as trail head parking). B. Improvement of Trail Head Parking: C. Trails: As provided in the TSP, OWNER will develop a publicly -accessible trail system on over 6.4 acres within the Project, providing connectivity to open space, surrounding public recreation facilities, and trails. The trail system, which will include a scenic promenade and network of sidewalks and multi -use trails, will be constructed in phases as the Project is developed. The trail system shall remain accessible to the general public in perpetuity and shall be made available in the same manner as if it were a public trail system, subject to such reasonable rules and regulations as established from time to time by the homeowner's association responsible for ownership and maintenance of the trail system. D. Open Space Preservation; Habitat Reserve: As provided in the TSP, approximately 301.2 acres of land within the Project will be used for open space uses. Of the 301.2 acres, there will be approximately 2.3 acres dedicated to domestic water facilities owned and operation by CVWD. Furthermore, there will be approximately 100 additional acres purchased in Section 5 below which will provide habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni), a federally -designated threatened species, and other species ( "Habitat Reserve"). The Habitat Reserve will be managed and monitored in perpetuity under an endowment funded by OWNER at no cost to CITY. The Habitat Reserve will be restricted by a conservation easement, deed restriction or similar restriction to ensure its preservation as a habitat area as required by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or other applicable resource agency. E. Maintenance Responsibilities Regarding Park, Trails and Open Space: Section 5 below provides a detailed breakdown of the various maintenance responsibilities of the Parties regarding roadways, infrastructure, park, open space and other improvements. F. Financing District: All reasonable costs of CITY related to the formation of any Financing District contemplated by this Agreement will be paid by OWNER or reimbursed by the Financing District as more specifically described in Exhibit F. Any such Financing District may include all or a portion of the Project. CITY shall not be responsible for any Financing District obligations except as otherwise provided in Exhibit F. 3. Circulation Imurovements A. Public and Private Streets within Project: The extension of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 (as shown on the TSP) and any streets with a back -of -curb to back -of -curb width of 36 feet wide or greater shall be acquired by, or conveyed to CITY in as public rights -of -way from back -of -curb to back -of -curb upon completion of construction in compliance with plans therefor approved by CITY. Other streets within the Project may be maintained by a homeowner's association at no cost to CITY, and, if any such street is private, CITY will permit it to be gated. B. Construction and Funding of Circulation Improvements. The construction and funding for the circulation improvements referenced in Paragraph 3.0 (the "Jefferson Street Improvements"), Paragraphs 3.1) (the "Avenue 62 Improvements"), and 3.E below (the "Other Circulation Improvements") shall be as follows: i. Jefferson Street Improvements: Prior to the issuance of the 601 st certificate of occupancy for a residential dwelling unit within the Project, OWNER shall substantially complete OWNER's share of the Jefferson Street Improvements (based upon the segment of 2 61463025A 1077 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT roadway specified in this Section 3 and as further illustrated on Exhibit D-1 attached hereto, which segment is the same as what is specified in Appendix M.1, Section 4.16 of the EIR,) as said improvements are described in the Traffic Study for the Travertine Residential Project, La Quinta dated September 27, 2021 (the "Traffic Report"). In the event that construction of OWNER's share of the Jefferson Street Improvements requires that OWNER also construct any portion of CITY's share of said improvements as described in the Traffic Report (the "City Portion"), then OWNER shall set up separate accounting for the construction of the City Portion and construct the City Portion at OWNER's cost, subject to reimbursement by CITY through one or more of the following: (a) payment to OWNER by CITY from its general fund or other funds available to CITY in the amount of the actual cost of the CITY Portion constructed by OWNER (the "CITY Share"), (b) issuance by CITY to OWNER of credits equal to the CITY Share to be applied against payment of Development Impact Fees, as defined in the Agreement, (c) payment by CITY of funds deposited by OWNER for the Other Circulation Improvements specified in Section 3.E below from the escrow account established pursuant to Section 3.13(iii) below, or (d) the execution by CITY of a promissory note to OWNER (the "Reimbursement Note") in the amount of the CITY Share. CITY shall pay the CITY Share to OWNER, issue the Development Impact Fees credits to OWNER, or deliver the Reimbursement Note to OWNER within thirty (30) days of CITY's receipt of OWNER's invoice for the CITY Share, together with backup information substantiating how the CITY Share of the actual construction costs of the CITY Portion was determined. ii. Avenue 62 Improvements. Prior to City's certification of grading for Phase A of the Project, OWNER shall substantially complete, the Avenue 62 Improvements described in Section 3.13 below. iii. Other Circulation Improvements. The Other Circulation Improvements described in Section 3.E below shall be constructed by CITY at such time as determined by CITY. The parties agree that CITY shall determine the order of priority in which it constructs the Other Circulation Improvements. OWNER's "Fair Share" of the Other Circulation Improvements shall be the portion of the cost of such improvements based upon the segment of roadway as specified in this Section 3 and as further illustrated on Exhibit D-1 attached hereto. OWNER shall either (a) pay or cause (through a public Financing District) its Fair Share of the cost of the Other Circulation Improvements (which cost is based upon the estimated price for each such improvement in the Traffic Report, including the contingency) by depositing said Fair Share into an escrow account established by City for all Other Circulation Improvements prior to the issuance of the rough grading permit for the Project, or (b) pay its Fair Share of the cost of the Other Circulation Improvements based upon the contract price for each Other Circulation Improvement within thirty (30) days after OWNER's receipt of written notice from CITY that CITY has acquired the necessary right-of-way and has awarded a construction contract for the Other Circulation Improvements. (For OWNER payments pursuant to subsection (b) of the preceding sentence, if City constructs the Other Circulation Improvements pursuant to separate contracts for one of more of said improvements, then OWNER shall pay CITY the amount of OWNER's Fair Share for the applicable improvement to be constructed within thirty (30) days after OWNER's receipt of written notice from CITY that CITY has acquired the necessary right-of-way and has awarded a construction contract for each such Other Circulation Improvement.) Upon construction and/or payment of its share of the Circulation Improvements as provided in subsections (i), (ii) and (iii) above, OWNER shall be deemed to have fully satisfied its obligations with respect to the construction and funding of the Circulation Improvements described above. C. Jefferson Street Improvements. The Jefferson Street Improvements are generally described as follows: i. Widening/Surfacing: Jefferson Street will be extended, widened and resurfaced to a 40-foot-wide roadway, from Avenue 58 and extending across Guadalupe Creek 61463025A 1078 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Diversion Dike to include one lane in each direction, with 40' pavement section with sidewalk on the west side. ii. Sidewalks, Landscaping and Related Improvements: In connection with the Jefferson Street roadwork, new curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscape improvements will be installed. A 6-foot-wide sidewalk and related landscape improvements will be constructed within the SP area. iii. Bike Lanes: A Class II bike lane will be completed within the road right-of- way providing access to other areas of CITY. iv. Bus Stops: Additional bus stops or turnouts are proposed along Jefferson Boulevard near the Project site. D. Avenue 62 Improvements: Development of the Project will also include the following improvements that will improve circulation and safety on Avenue 62. i. Culvert/Drainage Improvements: Construction of drainage -related infrastructure adjacent to Avenue 62 to reduce or minimize flooding on Avenue 62 during storm events. E. Surrounding Roadway Improvements: Construction and/or Fair Share contribution of roadway improvements outlined in the Traffic Report. F. Maintenance Responsibilities for Circulation Improvements: Section 5 below provides a detailed breakdown of the various maintenance responsibilities of the Parties regarding roadways, infrastructure, park, open space and other improvements. 4. Backbone Infrastructure and Related Benefits: Following issuance of the first permit for mass grading of the Project and at such times as provided in the Development Approvals or as required by applicable agencies in connection with such Development, OWNER will provide the following: A. Water Reservoirs: OWNER will construct two new onsite water reservoirs, as well as install a new pump station to service the 0.6-million-gallon reservoir These improvements will enhance the fire -flow capabilities of the water service system in this area of CITY. This will benefit both residents of the Project and residents of the City of La Quinta northerly of the Project. B. Water Quality Basins: OWNER will construct a number of water quality basins, bioswales, water quality filtration inlets, detention basins and similar features designed to enhance water runoff from the Project. This will enhance water quality to receiving waters, reduce pollutant runoff, and promote groundwater recharge. C. Maintenance Responsibilities for Backbone Infrastructure: See Section 5 below for detailed breakdown of the various maintenance responsibilities of the Parties regarding roadways, infrastructure, park, open space and other improvements. 5. Maintenance Responsibilities. Other than for the public walkway and landscaping along Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 (which will be maintained by CITY or LLMD), OWNER shall provide for ongoing maintenance of all landscaping (including all common area landscaping and landscaping within public rights -of -way within the Project boundary), trails, walkways and protected open space installed or located within the Project, including but not limited to all public rights -of -way except for the public facilities, through a homeowner's association or other financing mechanism at no cost to CITY. CITY shall maintain, at its sole cost and expense, the curbs and M 61463025A 1079 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT pavement between the curbs, the storm drain lines installed within the open space to service the Project, as well as other sewer and storm drains as shown on the attached "maintenance responsibility" exhibits. Depictions showing the respective maintenance obligations of OWNER and CITY as described above, as well as maintenance responsibilities not specified above of OWNER, CITY and other responsible parties, are attached hereto as Exhibits D-2 and D-3. 6. Incorporation of Sustainable Features in Development A. LandscVLn : OWNER will install substantial landscape material, including trees, shrubs, and ground cover on the Project site during Development of the Project. This will facilitate absorption of greenhouse gases. B. Home Design: OWNER will ensure implementation of project design features and compliance with all greenhouse gas emissions mitigation measures identified in the Project Approvals. C. Community Facilities Design: OWNER will incorporate all project design features and ensure compliance with all greenhouse gas emissions mitigation measures identified in the Project Approvals. D. Site Planning: In connection with site planning for the Project, the Project proposes resource efficient building design by installing green roofs and solar panels, considering the solar orientation of the buildings to reduce environmental impacts, and implementing passive and active solar systems to take advantage of local climate conditions. In addition, the incorporation and design of the internal roadways, sidewalks and multi -use trail system will enhance and encourage residents to walk or bike to nearby resort, retail, golf training facility and recreational facilities. E. Project Design Features (PDFs): OWNER will incorporate the following design features and attributes for promoting energy efficiency and sustainability, which shall be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement and the Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. • Pedestrian connections shall be provided to surrounding areas consistent with the City's General Plan. Providing a pedestrian access network to link areas of the project site encourages people to walk instead of drive. The project would provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. • The project will include improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity. Improved street network characteristics within a neighborhood include street accessibility, usually measured in terms of average block size, proportion of four- way intersections, or number of intersections per square mile. Design is also measured in terms of sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian -oriented environments from auto -oriented environments. • The project will design building shells and building components, such as windows; roof systems: electrical and lighting systems: and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems to meet Title 24 Standards in effect at the time of construction. 2019 Title 24 standards are expected to result in 30% less energy for non-residential buildings and 53% less energy use for residential use due to lighting upgrades. 5 61463025A 1080 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT • The project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which prohibits the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in new development. Using electricity generated from photovoltaic (PV) systems displaces electricity demand which would ordinarily be supplied by the local utility. Since zero GHG emissions are associated with electricity generation from PV systems, the GHG emissions reductions from this PDF are equivalent to the emissions that would have been produced had electricity been supplied by the local utility. A minimum of 15% of the project's electricity demand will be generated on -site. • In order to reduce the amount of waste disposed at landfills, the project would be required to implement a 65% waste diversion as required by AB 939. The following PDFs are part of the project, but no numeric credit has been taken for their implementation to provide a conservative analysis: • Specified use of Energy Star appliances. • Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures. • Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes. • Use of drought -tolerant plants in landscape design. • Installation of water -efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls. • Lighting sources contribute to GHG emissions indirectly, via the production of the electricity that powers these lights. Public street and area lighting includes: streetlights, pedestrian pathway lights, area lighting for parks and parking lots, and outdoor lighting around public buildings. Lighting design should consider the amount of light required for the area intended to be lit. Lumens are the measure of the amount of light perceived by the human eye. Different light fixtures have different efficacies or the amount of lumens produced per watt of power supplied. This is different than efficiency, and it is important that lighting improvements are based on maintaining the appropriate lumens per area when applying this measure. Installing more efficacious lamps will use less electricity while producing the same amount of light, and therefore reduces the associated indirect GHG emissions. N 61463025A 1081 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT D-1 Owner's Circulation and Public Benefit Improvements Increased Habitat Area and Open Space - Approximately 357.1 acres of open space, which includes (a) approximately 55.9 acres to be dedicated or used for public recreational, staging areas, gathering areas and trail purposes, open space uses including picnic tables, barbeques, golf practice facilities, and staging facilities for the public regional interpretative trail and (b) 301.2 acres of natural open space uses, consistent with the TSP. 2. Public Trails and Staging Area - The Project will provide approximately 5 miles of public trail with a small staging area with parking located at the eastern project entry south of Ave 62. The trail will incorporate educational elements highlighting native desert ecology and floral and faunal species, including Peninsular bighorn sheep. 3. Jefferson Street Improvements - Off -site, the Project will be responsible to construct interim cross-section improvements along Jefferson Street from the Project boundary to Avenue 58 and extending across Guadalupe Creek Diversion Dike to include one lane in each direction, with 40' pavement section with sidewalk on the west side. On -site, Jefferson Street should be constructed from the North Loop intersection to the northerly Project boundary at its ultimate full section width, with curb and gutters. 4. Avenue 62 Roadway Improvements — The Project will be responsible to construct interim cross-section improvements along Avenue 62 west of Monroe Street and extending across Dike No. 4 to include one lane in each direction, with 40' pavement section with sidewalk on the north side. 5. Madison EVA — The Project will be responsible to construct 1 mile of roadway improvements to Madison Street from Ave 60 to the SP boundary as an emergency vehicular access to include one lane in each direction, with 24' pavement section. 6. CVWD Water Tanks and Access Road — Two on -site reservoirs (Zone 335 and Zone 425) and access to be constructed. The volume of the upper tank will be 600 thousand gallons and the lower tank will be a volume of 2.65 million gallons. 7. Up to Five (5) CVWD Well Sites — The project will develop up to five well sites located within a 2-mile radius of the project site. 8. TOT — Revenue from Resort uses and Short -Term Vacation Rentals. 7 61463025A 1082 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT D-2 Depiction of Landscape and Street Maintenance Responsibilities IL IF 61463025A 1083 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT D-3 Depiction of Storm Drain Maintenance Responsibilities I - r ., I w S ftlH1�7 •- MbATNEZ F� ,y 1 j ►7 61463025A 1084 DRAFT VERSION / PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT E FORM OF GRANT DEED/OFFER FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES [to be attached] 10 61463025.0 1085 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT F FINANCING OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND POTENTIAL PUBLIC PROPERTIES CITY and OWNER acknowledge that the Development Agreement contemplates the establishment by City Council or another agency authorized to establish a Financing District or one or more Financing Districts. It is expected a single Financing District will be established under the provisions of the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, to finance the acquisition of Potential Public Properties and the acquisition and construction of Public Facilities necessary to meet increased demands placed upon local agencies as the result of the development of the Property or as referenced elsewhere in the Development Agreement. CITY and OWNER shall use good faith efforts to establish one or more Financing Districts that include the Property, subject to the Goals and Policies, except to the extent any such goal or policy is waived by action of the City Council, applicable State law and the following general considerations: A. General Parameters. i. Formation Advance. Upon written demand of CITY's Finance Director, OWNER will advance amounts necessary to pay all reasonable costs and expenses of CITY to evaluate and structure one or more proposed Financing Districts that include the Property, to the end that CITY will not be obligated to pay any costs related to the formation or implementation of the proposed Financing District(s) from its own general fund. CITY staff will provide OWNER with a Deposit/Advances Agreement and a preliminary budget for such costs at such time as OWNER decides to move forward with the formal process of establishing the Financing District(s), and will advise OWNER from time to time as to any necessary modifications to that budget. ii. Reimbursement of Advance. If requested by OWNER, each Financing District will provide for the reimbursement to OWNER of any advances by OWNER described in Subparagraph A.i. above, and any other costs incurred by OWNER that are directly related to the Financing District(s), such as the costs of legal counsel, financial advisors, special tax consultants, engineers and other persons retained by OWNER. OWNER agrees to promptly submit to CITY a detailed accounting of all such costs incurred by OWNER upon written request, but in any event at least thirty (30) days prior to the issuance of any Bonds for the Financing District. Such other costs will be reimbursed to OWNER, without interest, only from the proceeds of Bonds issued for the applicable Financing District, and then only to the extent that CITY's bond counsel determines that such reimbursement is permitted under relevant State law, and CITY's Finance Director determines, with the assistance of CITY's Financial Advisor, that such costs are reasonable and necessary to the formation of the applicable Financing District, or otherwise were incurred in furtherance of the purposes of the applicable CFD. iii. Selection of Financing Team. The CITY will, in consultation with OWNER, select the financing team, including bond counsel, underwriter, appraiser, absorption consultant, financial advisor, special tax consultant and other consultants deemed necessary by the CITY to accomplish any Financing District financing. B. Financing District Boundaries. It is expected the Financing District will only include the Property or portions thereof. The Financing District may include more improvement areas designated pursuant to Section 53350 of the Government Code (each, an "Improvement Area") corresponding to grading phases of the Property, or as otherwise desirable to reflect the manner and phasing of construction to occur on the Property, for purposes of financing of, or contributing to the financing of, Public Facilities, and the acquisition of Potential Public Properties. F-1 61463025A 1086 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT Each Improvement Area shall be authorized to finance all or any of the Public Facilities and Potential Public Properties regardless of the location of the Public Facilities or Potential Public Properties. C. Public Facilities and Properties. i. Public Facilities Construction Schedule. OWNER shall submit to CITY a description of, and proposed construction schedule for, any Public Facilities to be financed by the Financing District (except with respect to facilities to be financed at the option of CITY, as described elsewhere in the Development Agreement), including the priority and financing needs relative to the proposed Public Facilities. CITY will disburse available Financing District Proceeds (defined below) in accordance with such priorities, and as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement and the "Acquisition Agreement" (defined below). ii. Expenditure of Financing District Proceeds. Any Public Facilities to be financed must (i) be permitted under Section 53313.5 of the Government Code and must be necessary to meet increased demands placed upon local agencies as the result of development occurring in the Financing District, or (ii) be specifically authorized for financing elsewhere in this Development Agreement. iii. Construction of Public Facilities. The Public Facilities financed with the Financing District Proceeds shall be constructed in accordance with all applicable prevailing wage laws. Except as expressly set forth in the Development Agreement with respect to certain CITY facilities, it is expected that OWNER will be responsible for the construction of Public Facilities to be financed by the Financing District. CITY will determine, following consultation by CITY staff with OWNER, the bidding requirements and other terms applicable to the construction of Public Facilities, including the possible acquisition of discrete portions or phases of facilities as permitted by Section 53313.51 of the Government Code. CITY and OWNER will enter into an acquisition agreement setting forth the requirements for Public Facilities to be financed by the Financing District (the "Acquisition Agreement"). iv. Public Facilities Owned By Other Governmental Entities. If any of the Public Facilities proposed to be financed by a community facilities district will be owned or operated by a governmental entity other than CITY, CITY will use reasonable efforts to enter into joint community facilities agreements with respect to such facilities as may be required by Section 53316.2 of the Government Code; however, CITY shall not be required to indemnify or pay the costs of any such governmental entity except with respect to costs or claims arising from the CITY's negligence or willful misconduct or relating to the CITY's Public Facilities. Nothing in this Exhibit shall prevent OWNER from facilitating the execution of any such joint communities facilities agreement by offering to provide any such indemnity or to pay such costs. D. Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Taxes. i. Payment of Administrative Costs. The payment of actual initial and annual administrative costs of CITY to be incurred in connection with the Financing District shall be adequately assured, through the inclusion in any special tax methodology of appropriate provision for such costs as estimated by CITY, to the end that CITY's general fund shall never be called upon to provide for initial or any annual administrative costs related to the Financing District. ii. Rate and Method of Apportionment. The rate and method of apportionment of special taxes (the "RMA") for the Financing District and/or each Improvement Area within the Financing District must comply with the requirements of Section 53321(d) of the Government Code, but may establish different tax rates for different categories of property. CITY will consider any categories of property suggested by OWNER, but the apportionment of special taxes must be F-2 61463025A 1087 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT reasonable as determined by CITY. Given that undeveloped property (i.e., parcels without a building permit) has less of an impact on public facilities than developed property (i.e., parcels with a building permit), it is expected that special taxes will be levied first on developed property to its maximum special tax rate, and then on undeveloped property, as necessary to pay Financing District administrative costs and debt service on outstanding Bonds. iii. Maximum Annual Tax Rate. CITY shall not be under any obligation of any kind to approve an RMA which includes a maximum special tax rate applicable to residential parcels which, when added to all current and projected annual special taxes, real property taxes and other amounts due to public agencies that are secured by liens on such parcels (including but not limited to, liens imposed by any other community facilities district or financing district to fund school district obligations with respect to the Property), is expected to exceed two percent (2.0%) of the estimated market value of such parcels upon completion of expected public and private improvements. CITY and OWNER will cooperate in good faith to establish an RMA for each Improvement Area that will satisfy all applicable requirements of the California Government Code and that are consistent with the preceding sentence and with Subparagraph D.ii above. It is acknowledged that residential parcels will be developed over an extended period of time and that the pricing information determined as of the date of formation of the Financing District may reflect price appreciation that may not be achieved or may be exceeded such that changes to maximum special tax rates in the RMAs may be appropriate from time to time. In light of the foregoing, each RMA will include provisions authorizing an administrative reduction in the maximum special tax rates in one or more tax categories prior to the issuance of Bonds as requested by OWNER to reduce the special tax rates in one or more tax categories. In addition, CITY will, at the written request of OWNER, undertake proceedings pursuant to Section 53331 et seq. of the California Government Code to increase maximum special tax rates in the event of significant increases in expected sales prices of developed residential parcels, similar in lot size and square footage, from those used as a basis for the special tax rates in any RMA then in effect. iv. Annual Tax Increases. At OWNER'S request, each RMA shall provide for an annual increase in the maximum special tax up to 2% per year. Each RMA will allow for prepayment, in whole or in part, of the special tax at any time, pursuant to a methodology acceptable to CITY. V. Additional Special Taxes on Developed Properties. Each RMA may provide, at CITY's discretion, a separate annual special tax on developed property of up to $50 per residential unit (subject to increases as described in D.iv. above) (the "Additional Special Tax"), to be applied to the financing of construction and/or acquisition costs of public facilities designated by CITY in addition to those described in C.i. above, and in addition to any financing for the acquisition and/or construction of Potential Public Properties. vi. Direct Lew of Developed PropeM Special Taxes. Each RMA shall provide for the levy of special taxes on developed property to pay directly for the Public Facilities and Potential Public Properties. Prior to the issuance of Bonds, the Financing District shall levy special taxes on developed property at the maximum special tax rate and the amount collected each year shall first be applied to pay Financing District annual administrative costs and the remainder shall be deposited in a discrete, interest -earning special tax fund (the "Special Fund") and disbursed to pay for Public Facilities and Potential Public Properties pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement. The amounts deposited in the Special Fund and the net proceeds of Bonds shall be referred to as "Financing District Proceeds." The Financing District may, as directed by the City, also levy the Additional Special Tax on developed property at any time. F-3 61463025A 1088 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT E. Financing Considerations. i. Financial Viability. The financial viability of any Improvement Area will be of material concern to CITY. CITY will consider written requests by OWNER as to the size, term and timing of any particular issuance of Financing District Bonds, as well as the advice of any financial consultant or underwriter employed by it in connection therewith. ii. Security. Each series of Bonds shall be secured solely by (a) special taxes, (b) proceeds of the Bonds issued that are placed in a bond fund or reserve fund for the financing, (c) tax increment revenues of any Infrastructure Financing District (IFD), if formed, but only to the extent specifically directed and agreed to by OWNER, CITY and the IFD, and (d), if required, credit enhancement. No CITY general funds or other CITY revenues or assets and no tax increment revenues of the IFD shall be pledged to the repayment of any public financing, except that tax increment revenues may be so pledged to the extent explicitly provided elsewhere in the Development Agreement or specifically directed and agreed to by OWNER, CITY and the IFD. Both Parties acknowledge that the security for the bonded indebtedness of the Financing District is non -recourse as to CITY and as to OWNER. iii. Debt Ratio. Except as otherwise authorized by the City Council in accordance with Section 53345.8 of the Government Code, the value of the real property that is subject to the special tax to pay debt service on the Bonds (determined in a manner consistent with the requirement of Section 53345.8 of the Government Code) shall be at least three times the aggregate direct and overlapping debt secured by liens on the real property or such higher value to lien ratio as is necessary to market the Bonds at rates comparable to those for similar financings in the public debt market at the time the bonds are issued. The value of any real property included in a community facilities district shall be determined by CITY in a manner consistent with the third sentence of Subparagraph D.iii. above and Section 53345.8 of the California Government Code prior to each issuance of debt obligations for a Financing District. iv. Credit Enhancement. Following consultation with the bond underwriter, CITY's financial advisor and OWNER, CITY may require a letter of credit from a financial institution acceptable to CITY for up to two years of debt service on a series of Bonds (except the portion of such debt service that is payable from special taxes on completed structures) to the extent that CITY determines such credit enhancement is appropriate in the circumstances or reasonably necessary to market the bonds at reasonable interest rates. The amount of such letter of credit shall be reduced as OWNER conveys property to others and/or structures are completed; and such letter of credit will be released: (a) at such time as the development of the Property has progressed so that annual special tax levies on developed property are sufficient to pay 60% or more of the annual debt service on the Bonds and annual administrative costs in order to provide security for the repayment of the bonds and (b) if and to the extent that substitute letter of credit or other form of credit enhancement (from a financial institution, and in a form, acceptable to CITY) is delivered to CITY. V. Provision of Financial Information. OWNER understands that CITY will have disclosure obligations under state and federal securities laws to prospective purchasers of debt incurred in connection with any community facilities district financing, and OWNER agrees to provide CITY with any financial and other information reasonably requested in connection with such disclosure obligations; provided, however, that if any such financial or other information is requested to be provided regarding OWNER's parent corporation, such information shall be limited to publicly available information provided by OWNER's parent corporation to state and federal governmental agencies in compliance with applicable securities laws. In addition, to the extent determined necessary by disclosure counsel for any community facilities district bonds to be issued, OWNER will execute and comply with its obligations under a continuing disclosure agreement intended to satisfy the requirements of applicable Federal securities laws. F-4 61463025A 1089 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT F. Disclosure to Future Landowners. OWNER shall comply with all applicable laws as to the disclosure of the existence of any community facilities district to the purchasers of any portion of the Property within the community facilities district. Any and all such disclosure documentation shall be filed by OWNER with CITY's Finance Director. The CITY may require the OWNER to submit to prospective purchasers of all or a portion of the Property, in addition to any disclosure required under applicable law, either: (a) a mutually acceptable form of disclosure statement or (b) a disclosure statement that indicates it has been prepared by CITY and that CITY is solely responsible for its contents. G. Best Efforts Undertaking. Although CITY agrees to use its best efforts to form one or more Financing Districts in accordance with the foregoing, it shall incur no monetary liability for its failure to form any such Financing District. CITY expects that CITY staff will meet and confer with OWNER from time to time with respect to all major aspects of the community facilities district prior to its formation, but the final decisions regarding all aspects of any Financing District shall be subject to the review and approval of City Council. F-5 61463025A 1090 DRAFT VERSION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT EXHIBIT G Chapter 3.25 - SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS [ ATTACH UPDATED ORDINANCE AS OF EFFECTIVE DATE ] F-6 61463025A 1091 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT H DRAFT TRAVERTINE PROJECT EXEMPTION FINDINGS FROM GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66300 REQUIREMENTS The City of La Quinta City Council does hereby find and determine as follows: 1. Government Code Section 66300(e)(3)(D), formerly 66300(h)(1), provides that the requirements of Section 66300, et seq. that constrain the authority of the City of La Quinta ("City") to lower the residential dwelling unit density and intensity of use of real property through General Plan, zoning and other entitlement amendments do not supersede limit or otherwise modify the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq.) ("CEQA"). 2. The requirements of CEQA apply to "discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies, including, but not limited to, the enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, the issuance of zoning variances, the issuance of conditional use permits and the approval of tentative subdivision maps ...." (Pub Res. Code § 21080.) 3. The environmental impact report certified by the La Quinta City Council on June 6, 1995 for the Travertine Specific Plan (State Clearing House No. 94112047) (1995 EIR") and the Travertine Specific Plan (1995 Specific Plan") approvals contemplated a maximum development of 2,300 residential dwelling units; however, the 1995 EIR and 1995 Specific Plan included many mitigation measures and conditions of approval that required additional environmental analyses before issuance of various federal, state and City permits and other approvals. The findings and conclusions of these additional environmental analyses have adversely impacted the amount of developable land and hence the number of residential dwelling units that can be developed within the 1995 Specific Plan area, as further discussed below. 4. Inasmuch as satisfaction of and compliance with the 1995 EIR mitigation measures and 1995 Specific Plan conditions of approval required extensive additional environmental analyses, the 1995 EIR is a de facto program environmental impact report that requires follow-on CEQA compliance in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c). 5. The 1995 EIR mitigation measures, 1995 Specific Plan conditions of approval, in addition to other applicable species and habitat conservation plans approved after 60133402.v1 1092 DRAFT certification of the 1995 EIR and approval of the 1995 Specific Plan requiring extensive further environmental analysis in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) include, but are not limited to, the following: A. Hydrology and Drainage. 1995 EIR mitigation measure 3.7.2 requires the design and construction of storm water works including "Detention basins, and other storm water protective works [that] shall be constructed to protect structures from 100-year flooding." Such storm water works must meet the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District ("CVWD") and the City's Public Works Department. 1. To comply with 1995 EIR mitigation measure 3.7.2, a Drainage Master Plan was prepared, in 20201 in accordance with CVWD, City Public Works Department and United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (for potential flood impacts to Dike No. 4, which did not exist in 1995 and is under the jurisdiction of the United States Bureau of Reclamation) requirements, taking into consideration the potential dynamic hydraulic, sedimentation and erosion conditions present at the 1995 Specific Plan site. The 2020 Drainage Master Plan is included in the administrative record of proceedings for certification of the environmental impact report required to satisfy CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c), as discussed in Section 4 above (State Clearinghouse No. 2018011023) ("2021 EIR") for a General Plan amendment, specific plan amendment, tentative tract map and development agreement ("Revised Land Use Entitlements"). 2. The 2020 Drainage Master Plan identified project related impacts to the existing hydrologic and flood control features that affect the 1995 Specific Plan area and regional flood control and local drainage improvements required for development of the 1995 Specific Plan and to satisfy the 1995 EIR Mitigation Measures. 3. Implementation of the 1995 EIR Mitigation Measures, BO and other environmental requirements, as well as 2020 Drainage Master Plan will consume 394 acres of developable land as identified in 1995 Specific Plan area as depicted on Exhibit "A" hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, resulting in a reduction of 1012 residential units that can be developed. These acreage and unit reductions are detailed further below. B. Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. 1995 EIR mitigation measure 3.8.3 and Specific Plan condition of approval 15 require an assessment of impacts to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep and habitat associated with development of the 1995 Specific Plan area. 1. In June, 2004, in order to comply with 1995 EIR mitigation measure 3.8.3 and 1995 Specific Plan condition of approval 15, the owner of the Travertine Specific Plan area submitted a request to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") to initiate a 60133402.v1 1093 EXHIBIT A Current Boundary Devil Canyon Development Footprint 508.2 AC RPA with 200' Buffer I IX L16 * I L r + .1 Proposed f x �` Basins 41 Middle North } 1 Canyon 1 — 1 — Ctronmhorl R r--_ Middle South : -\C�achellaVaIle�Mulfii le ; Canyon Species Habitat/Critical Habitat Boundary (USFWS) +, s 1 Habitat 1 Cultural — Resources Restricted :Z, r Open Space NORTH This exhibit summarized the various elements that have shaped the current development footprint and supports the current entitlement effect of 1,200 DU. 1094 DRAFT Section 7 consultation process to assess the potential impacts to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep and habitat resulting from development of the Specific Plan area. 2. The Section 7 consultation process resulted in approval of a Biological Opinion by the USFWS (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) ("BO") after consultation with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Reclamation on December 7, 2005. The BO is included in the administrative record of proceedings for approval of the Revised Land Use Entitlements. 3. The BO concluded that a proposed reduction in the 1995 Specific Plan area plus the addition of critical habitat required to mitigate against impacts to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep as depicted on Exhibit "B" hereto and by this reference made a part hereof and explained above. C. Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan. In September and October, 2008, the state and federal governments, respectively, approved the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("CVMSHCP") to address impacts to certain species and their habitat resulting from development. Compliance with the CVMSHCP substitutes, in part, for CEQA compliance for assessments of impacts to each individual species covered by the CVMSHCP and is mandatory. 1. Compliance with the CVMSHCP requires that no development will be permitted within the San Jacinto Mountains Conservation area. The CVMSHCP is included by reference in the administrative record of proceedings for approval of the Revised Land Use Entitlements. 2. The 1995 Specific Plan included area that encroaches into the San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area that must now be left undisturbed and preserved in perpetuity in compliance with the CVMSHCP. 3. Removing affected development areas of the 1995 Specific Plan area from the San Jacinto Mountains Conservation area as depicted on Exhibit "C" hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, resulted in a reduction of Specific Plan area as described above. D. Jurisdictional Waters and Desert Dry Wash Riparian Woodland Habitat. Desert Dry Wash Riparian Woodland Habitat. The south end of the Specific Plan area contains a concentration of desert dry wash riparian woodland habitat that present within a number of ephemeral drainage courses flowing from mountains to the west and south. 1. Preservation of a significant portion of the desert dry wash riparian woodland habitat is necessary in order to provide nesting sites for a number of species of birds and habitat for terrestrial animals. 60133402.v 1 1095 EXHIBIT B Santa Rosa & San Jacinto Mtns. Conservation Area 0.a f ' j �� 81nExt t 4 OfKF URAT - .1- L' i� } CRITICAL HABITAT 13RODARY , R) 1, R6~i;T UCTED 1097 DRAFT 2. The 2021 EIR requires preservation of 55.98 acres of desert dry wash riparian woodland habitat as depicted on Exhibit "D" hereto and by this reference made a part hereof as a mitigation against loss of some of the habitat that will occur from development of the remainder of the Specific Plan area, resulting in a further reduction of 140 residential units that can be developed. 6. As a result of compliance with CEQA, the number of residential dwelling units that can be developed within the Specific Plan area has been reduced from 2,300 to 1,200. 60133402.v1 1098 EXHIBIT D 13 f Regrond 9oara Non -Wetland Waters & COM Junsd Liana: Suearelr_d (PD.-3e acres) CCFW Dmed Dry Vwnre VftodLYA Ham3t ISo".9S eareal 1099 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX EXHIBIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: Page 1 of 23 CiFNFRAI 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. Within 30 days of the approval of Specific Plan 2017-0004, the applicant shall provide the City with a final Specific Plan document in PDF format, with all redlines converted to final text. 3. Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387), 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 (LQMC) can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.laquintaca.gov. 4. Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) shall expire three (3) years from approval date, unless recorded or granted a time extension pursuant to the requirements of LQMC 13.16.090. 5. Tentative Tract Map 2017-0008 (TTM 37387) shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following related approval(s): EA2O17-0008 GPA2O17-0002 ZC2O17-0002 SP2O17-0004 DA2021-0001 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Design and Development Director shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. 6. 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: 1100 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 2 OF 23 • Riverside County Fire Marshal • La Quinta Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Development Services Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Exemption Form — Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit) • La Quinta Design and Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) • State Water Resources Control Board • SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above -listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval. 7. 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. 8. 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. 1101 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 3 OF 23 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 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 by these Conditions of Approval and all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures of the approvals identified in Condition of Approval 5 of these Conditions of Approval and the applicant shall execute and record an agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post -construction BMPs as required. 9. 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 1102 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 4 OF 23 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. 10. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual consultant's fees incurred by the City for engineering and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or instruments required by this project. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 11. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development from other jurisdictions or other agencies. 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. The applicant shall establish the aforementioned requirements in the CC&Rs for the development or other agreements as approved by the City Engineer. 12. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition (PROPERTY RIGHTS; Condition of Approval 11), conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing private streets that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. 13. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-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 public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Modified Secondary Arterial) — 84 feet ultimate developed right of way except additional variable right of way dedication to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 1103 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 5 OF 23 2) Avenue 62 (Non -conforming Modified Secondary Arterial) — Varies 40' to 50' ROW from the centerline of Avenue 62 for a total 60 to 80 feet ultimate developed right of way except additional variable right of way dedication to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 15. The applicant shall acquire easement(s), license(s), and/or permit(s) from the County of Riverside and/or the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the portions of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 that extend into the BLM and/or County of Riverside's jurisdiction as shown on the tentative tract map prior to improvement plan approval. 16. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right- of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 17. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Private residential streets measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 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. The applicant shall establish provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the Design and Development Department prior to recordation. 2) Madison Street (Emergency Vehicle Access) — Private Street measured at edge of pavement shall have 24 feet travel width with no parking allowed on either side. C. CUL DE SACS The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative map or as approved by the City Engineer. 18. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 1104 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 6 OF 23 Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1" equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement. 19. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right- 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights - of -way as follows: A. Jefferson Street - 10-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 62 - 10-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 23. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street, Avenue 62, and Madison Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Tentative Tract Map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded Final Map. 1105 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 7 OF 23 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. The applicant shall provide access to Assessor's Parcel Number 766-110-005 as shown on Tentative Tract Map 37387. 27. The applicant shall provide access to properties within Section 5 of Township 7 South, Range 7 East as shown on Tentative Tract Map 37387 and shall grant access easements over the private streets within the Travertine Development. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 28. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan and 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. 29. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan and Specific Plan 2017-0004. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Modified Secondary Arterial) — 84' ROW Construct the street to its standard 42 feet from the centerline of Jefferson Street for a total 84-foot ultimate developed right of way and the requirements of these conditions. Phase 1 (Prior to 1 st Certificate of Occupancy) — Construct Jefferson Street from the east project boundary to the North Loop intersection. Phase 2 (Prior to 601 st Certificate of Occupancy) - Construct Jefferson Street from the North Loop intersection to Avenue 60. Other required improvements in the Jefferson Street right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: 1106 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 8 OF 23 a) Guadalupe Crossing (60' ROW) measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 40-foot travel width. b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. c) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) d) 8-foot wide bike lane (Class II Bicycle Path) e) Interim 14-foot wide striped median in Phase 1 of construction. 14-foot wide raised landscaped median shall be completed by the issuance of the 601 st Certificate of Occupancy. f) 6-foot wide sidewalk. If the sidewalk meanders, it shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that touches the back of curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. 2) Construct roundabouts on Jefferson Street at the North Loop and at the South Loop with the North Loop and South Loop Collector facilities in Phase 1 (Prior to 1 St Certificate of Occupancy). 3) Avenue 62 (Non -conforming Modified Secondary Arterial) — Varies 40' to 50' ROW from the centerline of Avenue 62. Construct in Phase 1 (Prior to 1 st Certificate of Occupancy) the street to its 40 to 50 feet from the centerline of Avenue 62 as shown on the tentative tract map and the requirements of these conditions. Other required improvements in the Avenue 62 right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. b) 8-foot wide bike lane (Class II Bicycle Path) c) At Station 140+50 to 152+00, interim 6-foot wide striped median in the Phase 1 of construction. 6-foot wide raised 1107 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 9 OF 23 landscaped median shall be completed by the issuance of the 601 st Certificate of Occupancy. At Station 152+00 to 191+41, 6-foot wide stiped median. d) At Station 140+50 to 160+00, 6-foot wide straight sidewalk. At Station 160+00 to 191-41, 6-foot wide sidewalk. If the sidewalk meanders, it shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that touches the back of curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. 4) Madison Street (Emergency Vehicle Access) — Construct in Phase 1 (Prior to 1st Certificate of Occupancy) Private Street with 24 feet travel width measured at edge of pavement with no parking allowed on either side. 5) Applicant shall pay the fair -share for improvements and/or traffic signals per the percentages calculated in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Urban Crossroads. The amount of the applicant's fair share shall be as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall pay the fair share prior to grading permit issuance. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 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, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed by the Engineering and Design and Development Departments and approved by the Design and Development Department prior to recordation. 30. 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. 1108 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 10 OF 23 31. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. 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: Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 35. 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. FINAL MAPS 36. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate mylars of the Final Map. 1109 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 11 OF 23 IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 37. 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). 38. 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 Mass Grading Plan 1" = 100' Horizontal B. On -Site Rough Grading Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal C. PM10 Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal D. Erosion Control Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal E. Hydrology Report (Plan submitted in Report Form) F. Final WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form) NOTE: A through F to be submitted concurrently. G H J Off -Site Street Improvements/ Signing & Striping 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4' Vertical Off -Site Median Landscaping Plans 1" = 40' Horizontal On -Site Street Improvements/ Signing & Striping Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4' Vertical 1" = 40' Horizontal 1110 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 12 OF 23 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. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. 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. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 39. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the "Plans, Notes and Design Guidance" section of the Public Works Department at the City website (www.lag uintaca.gov). Please navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 40. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. 41. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the FOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 42. 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 13 OF 23 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. 43. 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 Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 44. 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. 45. 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. 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. 46. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements including all flood control measures and Phase 1 of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 conditioned in STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS prior to issuance of the 1st Certificate of Occupancy. Phase 2 of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62 conditioned in STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS shall be completed by the issuance of the 601 St Certificate of Occupancy. 47. 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- 1112 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 14 OF 23 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. 48. 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. r4RAniNr, 49. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 50. 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. 51. 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, and B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a professional registered in the State of California, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and D. An Erosion Control Plan showing 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 WQMP prepared by an authorized professional registered in the State of California, and F. A grading bond in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the grading bond requirements. 1113 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 15 OF 23 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. 52. 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. 53. 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. 54. This development shall comply with LQMC Chapter 8.11 (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish elevation certifications, as required by FEMA, that the above conditions have been met. 1114 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 16 OF 23 DRAINAGE 55. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Tentative Tract Map 37387 Travertine or as approved by the City Engineer. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner. 56. 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. 57. 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. 58. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Planning Manager and the City Engineer. 59. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin or as approved by the City Engineer. 60. 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. 61. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots unless approved by the City Engineer. 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). 1115 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 17 OF 23 62. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. 63. 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. 64. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 65. The applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to street reconfiguration. Verification of the proposed storm water facilities including retention system is subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). If in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the applicant shall revise what is currently proposed in the preliminary hydrology study and drainage plan and make adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention/detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues of the Public Works Department and CVWD. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and aboveground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater that historically flows onto and/or through the project site. 66. If permitted by CVWD, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and the City Engineer, the applicant's proposal to discharge storm water directly, or indirectly, to the area behind Dike No. 4 shall require the applicant to execute an indemnification instrument as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Additionally, the applicant shall pay for all costs of sampling and testing associated with the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The applicant is required to construct required discharge treatment Best Management Practice facilities per the NPDES Permit but at a minimum shall install a CDS Unit or equal system as approved by the City Engineer. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative tract map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions for meeting these obligations. 1116 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 18 OF 23 Additionally, the applicant shall submit verification to the City of BOR and CVWD acceptance of the proposed discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, to the area behind Dike No. 4 prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit. 67. 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 68. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 69. 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. 70. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. 1117 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 19 OF 23 All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 71. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. CONSTRUCTION 72. 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 73. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 74. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, and common lots. 75. 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). 76. 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. Planning Manager 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 Planning Manager and/or City Engineer. 1118 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 20 OF 23 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 Planning Manager shall review and approve any such revisions to the landscape plan. PUBLIC SERVICES 77. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and as approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 78. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 79. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, common areas, perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, sidewalks, and stormwater BMPs. 80. The Applicant acknowledges that the City intends to form a Travertine Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 81. The Applicant shall make provisions for maintenance of all common areas, public landscape areas, and storm water retention areas within Tract Map No. 37387 via one or a combination of the following methods prior to final map approval: A. Applicant shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved public landscape areas, landscape buffer, and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved common areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. 1119 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 21 OF 23 B. Applicant shall submit to the Design and Development Department Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure all private common areas and facilities will be maintained. A homeowner's association or associations shall be created with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. FIRE 82. This project will require the construction, equipping and placing in service of a new fire station. In conjunction with the recordation of the Final Map, Developer shall record a covenant assuring the participation of each and every landowner in contributing its fair share of the cost of construction of a fire station to serve the project. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. This station will be located as specified by the Fire Department. Timing of construction or funding to be approved by the Fire Department and City Staff. 83. A water flow monitoring system and/or fire alarm system may be required and determined at time of building plan review. Ref. CFC 903.4, CFC 907.2 and NFPA 72. 84. Fire Apparatus Access Roads A. Street and Precise Grading improvements affecting Fire apparatus access shall be reviewed by Fire Department. B. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of buildings, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department. C. Fire Department Access - Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed, constructed and maintained to support the imposed loads of RVC fire apparatus with a total weight of 80,000 pounds. Apparatus weight is distributed as 55,000 pounds on tandem rear axles and 25,000 pounds on the front axle. D. Fire Department Access Turn Around - Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with a bulb turnaround at the terminus. Additional turnaround designs may be acceptable as approved by the Fire Department. Reference Riverside County Fire Department Guideline OFM-01A for details. 1120 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 22 OF 23 E. Fire lane identification will be required when it is necessary to restrict parking of vehicles to maintain the required width of fire access roads for emergency vehicle use. Reference Guideline OFM-01A for the proper method of identifying the fire lane. F. All electronically operated driveway gates providing access to and from the tract shall be provided with Knox key switches and automatic sensors for emergency access. Manual gates shall be provided with approved Knox equipment. Ref. CFC 506.1. G. 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. H. Traffic calming devices shall be prohibited unless the design is reviewed and approved by the Office of the Fire Marshal. Ref. CFC 503.4.1. 85. 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. Reference CRC 313.2. 86. All new commercial buildings and structures 3,600 square feet or larger shall be protected by a fire sprinkler system. Reference CFC 903.2 as amended by the County of Riverside. 87. 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. 88. Fire Department Building Construction Permit Review - Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Department reviews these plans. These conditions will be based on California Fire Code, California Building Code (CBC), and related codes/standards adopted at the time of construction plan submittal. Reference CFC 105.1. 89. The required water system, including all fire hydrant(s), shall be installed, and accepted by the appropriate water agency (CVWD) and the Riverside County Fire Department prior to any combustible building material placed on an individual lot. Contact the Riverside County Fire Department to inspect the required fire flow, street signs, all weather surface, and all access and/or secondary access. Approved water plans must be at the job site. 1121 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2024-XXX CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2017-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2017-0002, SPECIFIC PLAN 2017-0004, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2017-0008 PROJECT: TRAVERTINE LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 60, NORTH OF AVENUE 64, WEST OF MADISON STREET ADOPTED: PAGE 23 OF 23 A. A phasing plan shall be approved by the Fire Department. Each phase shall provide approved access and water supply for fire protection prior to any construction. 90. Fire Hydrants and Fire Flow: The water system shall be capable of delivering the required fire flow. Fire hydrant location and spacing shall comply with the fire code. Plans for the water system shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. An approved water supply shall be installed and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the arrival of combustible materials on site. Reference 2022 California Fire Code (CFC) 507.5.1, 3312, Appendices B and C. 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.) B. 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). 91. The 601 st certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until Jefferson Street from Avenue 60 (the project boundary of the Travertine Development) to Avenue 58 is constructed. 92. The project development and details outlined and provided mitigations presented in the Fire Access Master Plan (Approved 9/22/2020) shall be complied with. FEES AND DEPOSITS 93. 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. 94. 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). 95. The applicant shall either dedicate land or pay an in -lieu fee for parks or recreational facilities in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 13.48 (Park Dedications (Quimby Act)) prior to recordation of Final Maps for future residential tracts. 1122 IIS June 13, 2024 VISA CONSULTING, INC PLANNING'> CIVIL E14GiM-EEPINC IN L.e.NC SURVEYING Subject: Travertine Specific Plan Project Technical Memorandum ATTACHMENT 1 This technical memorandum is provided to the City to address comments and questions raised at the May 28, 2024 public hearing of the La Quinta Planning Commission on the Travertine Specific Plan Project ("Project") Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR"). The City is currently preparing the Final EIR for the Project. The Final EIR will include responses to all comments received in the CEQA-mandated review and consultation process that raise significant environmental points. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15132.) I. Questions Relating to the Project Circulation and Phasing Plan. The Project will be developed in phases. The phasing of the Project is described in Section 3.7 of the DEIR. The DEIR fully analyzes the air quality emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and traffic generation impacts of the Project phasing plan. (DEIR, p. 3-39.) As described in Section 3.8 of the DEIR, at buildout the Project property is proposed to be served by two access points: (1) the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a Modified Secondary Arterial; and (2) the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial west of Monroe Street. (DEIR, p. 3-42.) As is further described in the DEIR, the Travertine community land uses are proposed to be oriented on both sides of the Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 central spine roadway, with local loop collector roads emanating from the spine roadway via roundabouts to provide access to the neighborhoods. (DEIR Exhibit 3-14 (Circulation Plan).) The La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element identifies Avenue 62 at its current terminus at Dike No. 4 as a modified secondary arterial roadway. (DEIR, p. 3-42; La Quinta General Plan, Circulation Element, p. II-79; Exhibit II-2.) The Project proposes to extend Avenue 62 to cross over Dike No. 4. (DEIR, p. 3-30.) Riverside County Fire requires two access points to the Project site during both Project construction and Project operation to ensure adequate fire and emergency services (e.g., paramedics) to the site. (DEIR, pp. 4.14-19-4.14-20.) The extension of the existing terminus of Ave 62 west of Monroe Street and into the Project property has been approved by Riverside County Fire through the Fire Access Master Plan (FCMP2019-0008) as one of the two required points of access to the Project site. For this reason alone, elimination of the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike No. 4 is not feasible. Proposals to modify the crossing that have been provided to the City are likewise infeasible. For example, Avenue 62 cannot be "notched" into Dike No. 4 due to a number of reasons including 34200 Bob Hope r_:i-:o. Parr [10 Mi1a. 5?. CA 92270 76asn.981i MS,ACONSULTINGINC,COM 1123 proposed utilities, maintaining existing flood protection and preserving the integrity of the dike. The roadway will cross over the existing dike at a sufficient height (about 6') to allow for utilities to be placed without penetrating the dike. Penetrating the dike with utilities is discouraged by the Bureau of Reclamation considering the possibility of seepage to occur either along the utility trench or due to a leak and potentially causing a failure of the dike as earthen materials (fines) can be suspended and carried along the seepage path. Placing the roadway below the top of dike is also problematic due to utility issues described above and the potential for flood depths of fifteen (15) feet plus contained behind Dike No. 4. The Project has been designed to allow storm flows to travel around the Project and easterly to where the run-off is contained behind Dike No. 4. The Project improvements will not change or minimize the need for the protection that Dike No. 4 currently provides. II. The Extension of Avenue 62 Across Dike No. 4. There is no evidence that the proposed crossing of Avenue 62 over Dike No. 4 raises significant environmental concerns. Per DEIR Section 4.1, although the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike No. 4 would be visible from some private rear yards and golf course holes, impacts would not be significant because views of the panoramic Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and Coral Mountain to the west would remain largely visible due to their scale and massing. DEIR Exhibits 4.1-8, 14, and 15 illustrate that the bulk of visual impacts from the proposed crossing over Dike No. 4 fall within the area where the dike is already obstructing views to the southwest. Additional permanent changes to views at the top of the dike are minimal and considered to be less than significant. With respect to visual impact of trucks traveling at the height of a roadway atop the dike, a vehicle traveling 25 miles per hour over an estimated 20 feet of visibility at the top of the dike, would be visible for about 0.5 seconds.' Further, as discussed above, this visual contrast would not be considered significant because the vehicle would not appreciably alter the panoramic Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and Coral Mountain to the west, which is already obstructed by utility infrastructure (i.e., the already existing dike). As explained in the enclosed technical memorandum provided by Urban Crossroads, dated June 13, 2024, future long-range traffic volumes on Avenue 62 crossing over Dike No. 4 will not exceed a 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level. Pursuant to the City General Plan and noise ordinance, and as fully explained in the DEIR, the City does not consider noise impacts below 65 dBA CNEL to constitute a significant disturbance for residential and other noise sensitive uses. 1 This calculation was derived as follows: 25 miles/ 1 hour = 132,000 feet / 60 minutes = 132,000 feet/3600 seconds 132,000 feet / 3600 seconds = 20 feet / X seconds X = 3600 seconds (20 feet) / 132,000 feet = 72,000 / 132,000 = 0.5 sec 54200 Bob Mope Drive. Rancho Mirag?. CA 92270 760.32Q.M11 MSA£OMSULi'TNGINC.COM 1124 Construction traffic including workers, fuel trucks, maintenance trucks, material delivery trucks, etc. generated by the proposed Project will influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding off -site areas. This includes Project truck trips on Avenue 62 crossing over Dike No. 4. DEIR, Appendix C.1(Air Quality Impact Analysis) documents that approximately 288 construction trips and 74 vendor trips are expected. The 362 daily construction truck trips represent a fraction (less than 3%) of the 14,000 daily trips used to estimate the conservative worst -case future long-range 2040 traffic conditions and noise levels presented on Table 3. Therefore, consistent with the finding of the traffic analysis, construction traffic will not exceed the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level or constitute a significant disturbance for residential and other noise sensitive uses. III. Questions Regarding the Traffic Impact Study Roadway Segment Analysis. Table 1-7 in the Project Traffic Impact Study provides that average daily trips on Avenue 62 west of Monroe total 600 and 1800 in the existing condition and in 2031, respectively. The background growth on Avenue 62 for twelve years (from 2019 to 2031) is an interpolation of the `without project' volumes from 2019 to 2040, and it amounts to a total volume of 1,200 vehicle per day being added by 2031 to the 2019 volume of 600 vehicles per day west of Monroe. The addition of 1,200 vehicles per day is equivalent to the traffic generated by 127 single family detached homes. In other words, consistent with the City's anticipated growth projections, the annual background growth on Avenue 62 assumes the equivalent to 10 or 11 homes per year, occurring west of Monroe and east of the Project boundary. 34200 Bob Mope Drive. Rancho Mirag?. CA 92270 760.32Q.M11 MSA£OMSULi'TNG1NC.COM 1125 June 17, 2024 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. 898 Production Place Newport Beach, CA 92663 SUBJECT: TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN FOCUSED NOISE ASSESSMENT Dear Mr. Mark Rogers: Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to provide this Focused Noise Assessment for the Travertine Specific Plan ("Project"), which is located west Madison Street, in the City of La Quinta, California. We have prepared this Focused Noise Assessment to respond to the specific questions that were raised at the May 28, 2024 hearing of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission regarding the traffic noise impacts associated with the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4. BACKGROUND On April 18, 2023, Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared the Travertine Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis ("NIA"). The NIA was prepared to satisfy applicable City of La Quinta noise standards and significance criteria based on guidance provided by Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. While the NIA focuses on the noise impacts associated with the Existing, Phase 3 and 2040 Project traffic on eleven roadway segments, this Focused Noise Assessment identifies Project noise levels at individual receivers locations specifically adjacent to the Avenue 62 segment crossing over Dike #4. Focused Noise Assessment NOISE FUNDAMENTALS Noise is simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A -weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. Exhibit 2-A presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective loudness and effects that are described in more detail below. Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale frequently used to measure intensity is a scale based on multiples of 10, the logarithmic scale. The scale for measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. (1) The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at three feet is roughly at 60 dBA, while loud jet flyover noises equate to 110 dBA at approximately 1,000 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. (2) Another important aspect of noise is the duration of the sound and the way it is described and distributed in time. 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment 1126 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 2 of 7 EXHIBIT A: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS Comm" 007"OR tC WMaff 11i1~ A - MIMAIMM .# VLr EFM#� �F A&,Tlvfnm ACTrIPM N' -&6i LrMd" LOUGNM II CBE TNMSHRLID OF rAN 14R , NEAR JET EnG1NE In 124 Jkt PLY434LO At 30M [ION *1 SOCK PAND 110 106 so 1 -UD AUTO HORN GAS LAVOY MDVN-R AT Teti ❑f* WESELTAU€K AT 15M �50 zf A3 knlfhr0D mph] FOOD SPLEWER ATimQM i0 NOISY Ufd^-NARM DAY7MtE VACUUM CLEANER AT3mi10Ttt -M iFEECH LDUD IYITiVFERf Q H AVVr TJUFFIC AT Wm PWfl) NORMAL SPUCH AT lm P Nj a LM1RCk BU54NESS VFFUS, 96 gIAET UREL FI DAYOME 51FRP a1ST4RBANQ QUETUFMAN7I19PIMMF THEATEFLLARGE GGRFI3nE1dCV 40 ROCOA 13ACKGROUND}' QuIP1 SLOWROAM FgWfM E LWFLARY 30 FAINT QLWF RUNAL NIGNTT10Ai RMOOOM ATNIGHfT. C4NCELT U HALL JL4tXdFk)-U Wj W EFFECT ■ Mffi o[4 STe WCQR 1N n 4 5TU13po 10 YUYrAINT bDWLPST iHR@SHOLD OrHLJULH LOMffSTTHHiSHOLD OF HUMAN In HEAAWG HEARING RECEIVER LOCATIONS To assess the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4 noise impacts, the following nearby residential receiver locations, as shown on Exhibit A, were identified as representative locations for analysis. Sensitive uses or receivers are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could otherwise adversely affect the use of the land. To describe the potential off -site noise levels, ten receiver locations in the vicinity of the Project site were identified, including the location of the nearest existing noise sensitive residential receiver (R6 - 81307 Jasmine Ct.) located approximately 343 feet north of Avenue 62. Other sensitive land uses in the Project study area that are located at greater distances than those identified in this noise study will experience lower noise levels than those presented in this report due to the additional attenuation from distance and the shielding of intervening structures. Distance is measured in a straight line from the centerline to each receiver location. 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment CkURBAN CROSS zOAD, � 127 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 3 of 7 EXHIBIT A: NEAREST NOISE SENSITIVE RESIDENTIAL RECEIVER LOCATIONS LEGEND,, Receiver LWAlons 60 Au. 67 C0rncdkne -f Nskunce 1com receiver to Au 62 cenbrrillne{in fec+} 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment CkURBAN CROSSROAD, � 128 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 4 of 7 TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS This section analyzes the potential traffic noise impacts at the ten nearby residential receiver locations from the traffic going over the berm at the Avenue 62 crossing of Dike #4. Table 1 presents a summary of the roadway parameters used to predict the future exterior noise levels. The traffic volumes shown on Table 1 reflect future long-range 2040 traffic conditions that include both the Project traffic volumes and background traffic growth. The average daily traffic volumes are based Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (3) To ensure that the traffic noise analysis evaluates the reasonable worst - case traffic noise conditions, the change in elevation due to the roadway profile grade as well as the full throttle noise emissions due to vehicle acceleration and engine noise on Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4 were assumed in the analysis. Changes in vehicle speeds are largely influenced by the engine noise of accelerating vehicles instead of the deceleration associated with vehicle braking. (4) TABLE 1: ROADWAY PARAMETERS ID Road Segment Classification 2040 Average Daily Near/Far Lane Speed Traffic Volume Distance (Feet)2 (mph) 6 Av. 62 w/o Monroe St. Modified Secondary 14,000 42' 50 Source: Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Table 2 presents the time -of -day vehicle splits across a 24-hour timeframe and the traffic flow distributions (vehicle mix) used for this analysis. The vehicle mix is expressed as a percentage of the overall daily vehicle splits for all vehicle types. The vehicle mix used for purposes of this evaluation is the same as is presented on Tables 6-3 and 6-4 of the NIA and comprises heavy and medium trucks and autos, expressed as a percentage of the total modeled traffic flow by each vehicle type. This explains why the heavy truck time of day splits appear to disproportionally occur during the nighttime hours. As shown on Table 2, roughly 75% of the traffic volumes take place during the daytime hours, with 14% during the evening hours and 11% during the nighttime hours. Less than 1% of the project traffic is expected to consist of heavy trucks with approximately 2% medium trucks and the remaining 97% consisting of autos. The vehicle mix assumptions employed in the NIA are representative of a typical Southern California vehicle mix consistent with the required traffic noise modeling parameters outlined County of Riverside Office of Industrial Hygiene Requirements for Determining and Mitigating Traffic Noise Impacts to Residential Properties. (4) 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment CkURBAN caossaOAD, 1129 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 5 of 7 TABLE 2: AVENUE 62 VEHICLE MIX Time of Day Vehicle Mix Time of Day Split Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks Daytime 73.60% 0.90% 0.35% 74.85% Evening 13.60% 0.04% 0.04% 13.68% Nighttime 10.22% 0.90% 0.35% 11.47% Daily 97.42% 1.84% 0.74% 100.00% 1 County of Riverside Office of Industrial Hygiene. Values rounded to the nearest one -hundredth. Vehicle mix percentage values rounded to the nearest one -hundredth. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; "Evening" = 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The expected future noise levels at residential receivers identified in Exhibit A were calculated using, the parameters outlined in Tables 1 and 2, and the planned Avenue 62 roadway elevation profile accounting for noise source activities at the elevated top of Dike #4. Table 3 presents these calculations as a summary of future exterior noise levels for the private outdoor living areas of the residences closest to the top of the Avenue crossing and that are shown in Exhibit A. Table 3 indicates that the exterior noise levels will range from 52.1 to 59.9 dBA CNEL. Table 3 shows that the future long-range traffic volumes on Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4 will not exceed a 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level. As documented in the Project EIR, the city does not consider noise impacts below 65 dBA CNEL to constitute a significant disturbance for residential and other noise sensitive uses. TABLE 3: AVENUE 62 EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE Receiver Location' Address Av. 62 Traffic Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)z Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA CNEL)3 Noise Level Standards Exceeded?' R1 81272 Jasmine Ct. 52.9 65 No R2 81260 Jasmine Ct. 56.7 65 No R3 81271 Jasmine Ct. 59.9 65 No R4 81283 Jasmine Ct. 58.7 65 No R5 81295 Jasmine Ct. 55.8 65 No R6 81307 Jasmine Ct. 52.1 65 No R7 81319 Jasmine Ct. 54.8 65 No R8 81337 Rustic Cyn. Dr. 55.0 65 No R9 81349 Rustic Cyn. Rd. 57.7 65 No R10 81361 Rustic Cyn. Rd. 57.2 65 No 15ee Exhibit A for the receiver locations. z Future Avenue 62 exterior traffic noise levels with crossing over Dike #4. a City of La Quinta General Plan Noise Element Policy N-1.2) ° Do the estimated Avenue 62 traffic noise levels exceed the noise level standards? 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment CkURBAN caossaOADs 130 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 6 of 7 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS Construction traffic including workers, fuel trucks, maintenance trucks, material delivery trucks, etc. generated by the proposed Project will influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding off -site areas. This includes Project truck trips on Avenue 62 crossing over Dike 44. Based on the construction worker and vendor demand estimates from Travertine Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis, approximately 288 construction trips and 74 vendor trips are expected. The 362 daily construction truck trips represent a fraction (less than 3%) of the 14,000 daily trips used to estimate the conservative worst -case future long-range 2040 traffic conditions and noise levels presented on Table 3. Therefore, consistent with the finding of the traffic analysis, construction traffic will not exceed the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level or constitute a significant disturbance for residential and other noise sensitive uses. CONCLUSIONS Consistent with the findings of the NIA, this Focused Noise Assessment shows that the Project traffic associated with the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike #4 will not exceed the City of La Quinta 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standards (City of La Quinta General Plan Noise Element Policy N-1.2). Therefore, consistent with the findings in the NIA, the traffic noise impacts are considered less than significant at the nearby noise -sensitive receiver locations. Respectfully submitted, URBAN CROSSROADS, INC. VOV Bill Lawson, P.E., INCE Principal REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018. 2. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. March 1974. EPA/ONAC 550/9/74-004. 3. Urban Crossroads, Inc. Travertine Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis. September 2021. 4. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP Report 791). Supplemental Guidance of the Application of FHWA's Traffic Noise Model (TNM). 2014. 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment L�1 URBAN 131 Mr. Mark Rogers TRG Land, Inc. June 17, 2024 Page 7 of 7 County of Riverside, Office of Industrial Hygiene. Requirements for Determining and Mitigating Traffic Noise Impacts to Residential Structures. April 2015. 6. City of La Quinta. Municipal Code, Sections 9.100, 6.08. 12189-24 Focused Noise Assessment CkURBAN caossaoAD, 132 ATTACHMENT 2 PUBLIC COMMENT PH 1: TRAVERTINE 1133 June 20, 2024 BY EMAIL: CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION Dear Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chairperson Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, RE: TRAVERTINE DEIR EA2017- 0008, SCH# 2018011023 We, as Trilogy Residents, wish to thank you for your commitment to the City of La Quinta and for your service to the community at large. The purpose of this letter to let you know that we have urgent and significant concerns regarding inconsistencies found within both the DEIR itself (DEIR EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) and with the Applicant's presentation. These inconsistencies make it extremely difficult to provide comments during the Public Hearing on Travertine. Additionally, we wish to state that we are NOT against the TRAVERTINE PROJECT. We just ask for more clarity on issues as you will see in this letter. At the outset, please note that we have carefully studied the intent of the CEQA Process and wholeheartedly embrace and accept that the process must provide opportunities for meaningful public participation - including input and attendance at hearings. This is ensured only when all parties, especially those who reside in potentially impacted communities, have a clear understanding of a proposed project. Transparency and clarity are fundamental to the CEQA process. Here are just a few of the many discrepancies we have found in the DEIR, including inconsistencies in the DEIR on the same topic and when compared to the Applicant's presentation. 1134 1. INCONSISTENCIES WITHIN THE DEIR ON THE SAME TOPIC(S) A major concern that our team and others have is that ROADWAY descriptions in the DEIR are not consistent with a. the Applicant's presentation, AND b. different portions of the DEIR. Examples are provided below of confusing ROADWAY descriptions in the DEIR. Our team is concerned that there are other inconsistencies regarding other topics within the DEIR. EXAMPLE: The APPLICANT'S SLIDE presented at the May 28t" Planning Commission Meeting stated: "Madison Street as EVA only" Emergency evacuation (EAV) only 24' pavement built in Phase 1. PLEASE COMPARE THIS TO... WHAT IS IN THE DEIR in APPENDIX K of the DEIR "Land Use Consistency Analysis Tables" (page 6), where the following appears: "The Travertine community is proposed to be served by two access points during Project operation. One access point will occur at the southerly extension of Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 58, while the second will occur at the westerly extension of Avenue 62. Avenue 62 will be developed during Grading Phase A, crossing Dike No. 4, and extending westerly towards the Project. The crossing will require a license, secured by the City of La Quinta, and approved by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and approval from the County of Riverside. Project design details for the proposed circulation plan will be completed far enough for the BOR to determine the Project impacts and utilities. Jefferson Street will be extended south of Avenue 58 through the Coral Canyon development, a portion of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and continue through the Project to meet the extension of Avenue 62, creating a "spine" roadway The development of the proposed roadway extensions is dependent upon the timing of development of Coral Canyon and approvals through BOR and BLM. The Travertine community land uses are proposed to be oriented on both sides of the proposed Jefferson Street/Avenue 62 spine roadway... 1135 An emergency vehicle access road (EVA) will provide a secondary point of access for emergency use only, during the first phase of builder construction, or up to the first 600 units. The EVA will extend from the southerly termination of Madison Street to the interior of the Project to provide emergency access prior to the full extension of Jefferson Street and Avenue 62. The EVA will be developed prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy" AND AGAIN, PLEASE COMPARE THE ABOVE TO... WHAT IS IN THE DEIR in APPENDIX M.1 TIA Report, where the following appears: 4.16 Transportation "General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) with Madison Street Extension Conditions. The roadway network for the proposed Project includes a temporary and permanent extension of Madison street south from Avenue 60 to the Project property. It is envisioned as a secondary/emergency access that, once the Project buildout has occurred, will be closed from public use and be accessible only for emergency vehicles, CVWD maintenance and as an evacuation route" The Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2017-0004) and diagrams shown in the Applicants presentation, as well as descriptions in the DEIR would lead a reader to believe that the Jefferson / 58th Roadway is a very acceptable access route since the cut around Coral Mountain was approved by Coral Canyon. In the Planning Commission meeting, the Applicant clearly and emphatically stated at the Meeting that there will NOT be a Jefferson/58 roadway built until the Coral Canyon Project provides money for the roadway. If the original construction tourist and residence access is moved to Jefferson/ 58th, there would be significant costs savings to the applicant by not building an elevated roadway over the dike at Avenue 62. He would not need to wait until Coral Canyon provides funding All of the above illustrates significant inconsistencies in different sections of the DEIR and also with what the Applicant said in the presentation that was made to the PC. One says Madison will be only an EVA. Then the other section says Madison will be used as a secondary access until 2040. Again the DEIR contradicts itself. What and who are we, the public and especially those most impacted because we are adjacent to this proposed project, to believe? 1136 2. PHOTOS OF ROADS ARE MISREPRESENTED IN THE DEIR The photo below from the DEIR 4.1.-19 runs east/west and does not show the true elevation of the berm. It also avoids showing the Trilogy homes that are to the right (northeast) of the picture simulation. This gives an inaccurate portrayal of the extensive impact on Trilogy residents of the Avenue 62 crossing over the Dike #4. 3. VAGUENESS OF THE DEIR The vagueness of the DEIR has resulted in too many unanswered questions for readers especially, again, for those who live in adjacent communities and will be most impacted by the Project. EXAMPLE: In Appendix MA TIA Report prepared by Urban Crossroads on September 27, 2021, there are two options with 7 scenarios in the year 2040 for the roads into the development. 1137 The Draft and certainly the Final EIR must be FULLY TRANSPARENT on the acceptable options and concerns so that there is an understanding of the chosen access/egress points, when they will be put in place, when they will be changed and why. In closing, the DEIR needs to be more specific on many issues. Again, we wish to absolutely reiterate that we are NOT AGAINST the Travertine Project. We appreciate that the DEIR does not need to be so complicated that the average reader cannot interpret it, but there does need to be specific detail in this DEIR so that the reader can be well informed. For the CEQA process to be observed and be truly in the public interest, there must be clarity and transparency. We are writing to ask you the members of the PC to please take your time and ask the necessary questions. We hope this letter will be of some assistance to you. We encourage you to start by asking for the Final EIR, which hopefully is more detailed and clear, instead of the DEIR to base your decisions about the Project and vote upon. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, Alena Callimanis 81469 Rustic Canyon Drive Carolyn Winnor 81134 Barrel Cactus Road Derek Wong 81183 Caspian Court Diane Rebryna 60149 Honeysuckle Street 1138 June 20, 2024 BY EMAIL: CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION Dear Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chairperson Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, RE: TRAVERTINE DEIR EA2017- 0008, SCH# 2018011023 We, as Trilogy Residents, would like to first state that we appreciate and thank you for your commitment to the City of La Quinta and for your service to the community at large. The purpose of this letter to let you know that we have an extremely urgent concern that relates to the matter that you are currently tasked with for Travertine, to "CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS". At the last Planning Commission meeting on May 28, 2024, it was stated by the City staff and Attorney that our concerns at that time about the Planning Commissioners being asked to "recommend" the project to City Council on the basis of a DEIR were not legitimate. It was also stated by the same parties that this is the "way that it was done with the WAVE". We wish to categorically state that this is NOT how "it was done" with the WAVE and offer the following timeline of the WAVE for your ease of reference. Our summary of this information herein supports our request in this letter of the Planning Commission, which is stated at the end of this letter to you. BACKGROUND I TIMELINE 1. The email in the text box below issued to all commenters on the DEIR came from Nicole Criste on March 10, 2022 and indicates the release of Final Environmental Impact Report for the WAVE. 1139 From: Consulting Planner<ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> Subject: City of La Quinta - Final Environmental Impact Report / Response to Comments - Coral Mountain Resort Date: March 10, 2022 at 3:35:50 PM PST Thank you for taking the time to review the above referenced Draft EIR. The Final Environmental Impact Report/Response to Comments (FEIR) for this project is available on the City's website at: www.laquintaca.gov/cmresort. The FOR is also available for review at City Hall and at the Library, during their normal business hours. Your correspondence and those of other agencies/parties are included in Chapter 2. Revisions to the EIR are included in Chapter 3, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is provided in Chapter 4. A Public Hearing by the La Quinta Planning Commission on this matter is scheduled for 5:00 PM on March 22, 2022 in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. The proposed project and Draft/ Final EIR, will be considered at that time. You may submit additional comments in writing to the Planning Commission by mail, by email at consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov or in person at the hearing. The Planning Commission may consider recommending to the City Council that the project be approved or denied, or may continue the project to another date. A City Council hearing date has not been set. If you have any questions, please contact Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner, City of La Quinta, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253, or consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov. You will see that the Final Environmental Impact Report for Coral Mountain was issued twelve days prior to the first Planning Commission meeting on Coral Mountain. In Ms. Criste's note, you will notice that it is specifically stated that "The Final EIR includes your verbatim comments and responses to same"... and that "a Public Hearing by the La Quinta Planning Commission on this matter has been scheduled... " You will also notice that the City Council Meeting had not yet been scheduled. 2. The first meeting of the Planning Commission regarding the WAVE was held on March 22, 2022. At that time, Planning Commissioners were asked to: 1. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010 (for Coral Mountain). 1140 In total there were three meetings of the PC, the first being March 22, 2022 with continuances to April 12, 2022 and the third and final meeting to April 26, 2022 where you voted to approve the Final Environmental Impact Statement. In summary, it took the PC three (very long) sessions to do the thorough review of a FINAL Environmental Impact Report. At these meetings, you asked important questions of the City Staff and of the Developer and listened to the public, so that could ensure protection of the public interest by having a complete understanding of everything related to the project at hand. These meetings and questions that followed the issuing of the FEIR allowed each of you to make an informed decision so you could ensure that the mandate of the Planning Commission was met. AT THIS TIME, WE WISH TO REVIEW WHAT A FINAL EIR CONTAINS AS PER THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH (CALIFORNIA): https:Hopr.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/20210809-CEQA 101.pdf: "The final EIR consist of: (1) the draft EIR; (2) comments and recommendations received on the draft EIR; (3) the responses of the lead agency to the significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; (4) a list of persons and agencies commenting on the draft EIR; and (5) any other information added by the lead agency. (Guidelines §15132.)" WHY IS THIS BACKGROUND/TIMELINE and FINAL EIR CONTENT INFORMATION ABOVE RELEVANT? When our team noticed that this draft EIR that you are tasked with reviewing does not include all the comments submitted during the Travertine DEIR comment period, which 1141 ended December 11, 2023, we contacted the Planning Staff. We received the following On May 8, 2024, at 8:19 AM, Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> wrote: Hi Alena, The responses to all the comments on the Draft EIR are being prepared at this time and will be incorporated into the Final EIR, per the California Environmental Quality Act. Those responses along with the other Final EIR documents will not be available until 10 days prior to the Council meeting. They will be addressed they are just not ready yet. Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760-777-7067 www.laquintaca.gov reply: IN CONCLUSION: 1. For Travertine, you are being asked to review and approve a resolution for a Draft EIR and not a Final EIR. • Since the document you are reviewing is NOT the Final EIR, it does NOT include all the public and agency comments that were submitted by December 11, 2023. • We wish to reiterate that we know for sure that TWO very fulsome public comment letters were not included. One of these two were were brought to your attention during a presentation at the May 28, 2024 meeting. • The obvious question arises ... were there others? Is there any other key information that is missing from the DER that is necessary for you to make an informed decision to recommend or not recommend the project to City Council, as per your role as a Planning Commissioner ? 2. It appears, by virtue of the above, that you are being asked to "urgently" proceed with the task at hand with only the cursory information that the DER presents. Why not wait for the FEIR to be released as was done with the WAVE. Why would you want, in your roles, to proceed in this manner ? 1142 Regardless of the fact that the City Council makes the final decision on a Project, the Planning Commission is an important and integral part of the Process. 3. Research to date has repeatedly yielded the following information to our team ... and best summarized here on page 2, https://planning.lacity.gov/eir/StudioCity_SeniorLiving/ DEIR/01_Introduction.pdf... that "the Final EIR is used by recommending bodies (Le Planning Commission) and the final decision - makers (City Council) to weigh the (identified) environmental impacts against a proposed project in order to make an informed decision" 4. Please note that meaningful public participation - whether verbal, in person, or both - is a KEY part of the CEQA process and again, an integral part of protection of the public interest. We ask please that you consider the above information in its entirety and "continue" the next meeting of the Planning Commission to a date uncertain when the FEIR is released. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, Alena Callimanis 81469 Rustic Canyon Carolyn Winnor. 81134 Barrel Cactus Rd. Derek Wong 81183 Caspian Ct. Diane Rebryna 60149 Honeysuckle Street 1143 Re: Travertine Project Eddie Chernoff <eddiechernoff54@gmail.com> Fri 6/7/2024 5:09 PM To:Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Cc:Tania Flores <tflores@laquintaca.gov>;Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov> Some people who received this message don't often get email from eddiechernoff54@gmail.com. Learn why this is important ** 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. Also, I was a science teacher in a previous life and Mark was dead wrong when he claimed sound goes up, not down (I can't believe he actually said that). Sound is produced by movement of air. When you are under a highway you hear the noise from the above traffic. Eddie Chernoff eddiechernoff54@gmail.com On May 30, 2024, at 9:OOAM, Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> wrote: Hello Mr. Chernoff, Thank you for your comments. I will forward them along to the Planning Commission. Have a wonderful day! Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta <image001.png> 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760-777-7067 www.laquintaca.gov From: Eddie Chernoff <eddiechernoff54Pgmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 5:37 PM To: Planning WebMail <Planning@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine Project Some people who received this message don't often get email from eddiechernoff54@gmail.com. Learn why this is important ** 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, live in Trilogy almost against the berm, so this project is of concert to me. I was not able to attend the May 28 meeting but did listen to it online and have some comments I would like addressed. 1. It was mentioned that the traffic on 62nd would be mitigated once Jefferson joined 62nd within the project and that most people would drive north on Jefferson to go to Old Town or Palm Desert or PSP. I do not agree because Jefferson stops at PGA West and would require a driver to turn onto 58th back to Madison in order to head north. It would be easier for residents of Travertine to take 62nd to Monroe to head north, not Jefferson. 62nd would bear the brunt of the residential and service traffic. 2. Short term rentals. This is of particular concern to me. I have to assume Travertine will have an HOA and the one item VRBO or Airbnb renters have no knowledge of nor would you expect them to, are the CC&R's of the HOA. And although the gentlemen Mark spoke about renting a VRBO in The Cove, and I have done the same, I can tell you my 32 year old son rents VRBO's and he packs as many young people as they can into these rentals. And with Coachella and Stagecoach not to mention just golf vacations, there will be a great deal of extra traffic from these renters. A rental requiring a lease forces the renter to abide by the CC&R. Short term rentals do not. 3. Trucks and traffic over the berm. As a resident of Trilogy I can tell you we will see and hear the traffic over the berm 1144 4. Lexan as a wall. I was in an industry where I have intimate knowledge of Lexan. Lexan is a brand name for polycarbonate and ALL polycarbonate reacts to UV light, which we have an abundance of here in the desert. Relating its use to a beach area is not equivalent. It will yellow over time and become brittle. Eddie Chernoff Resident of Trilogy La Quinta eddiechernoff54@gmail.com 1145 June 18, 2024 Ms. Cheri Flores Planning Manager, City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Ms. Flores: As you know, I am a partner with Willard Kelsey in a number of properties located within the City of La Quinta. One of the parcels, APN 766-110-005, owned by Willard Kelsey and Maria Allgood, is located entirely within the proposed Travertine development. There are also three remaining Kelsey parcels that are contiguous to Travertine. The land planner, TRG Land, has provided a twenty four foot wide easement to the above noted 005 parcel. It is my understanding, based on the last Planning Commission Meeting that TRG Land is now on notice that this easement is not sufficient to provide for development of the 005 parcel and some accommodation must be made to provide proper access. It should be noted that on November 9t" of 2021, in a meeting with Mr. Rogers at TRG, he and I discussed possible purchase, joint development, or our independent development of the 005 parcel. At that time Mr. Rogers informed me, "I have provided all the access you need and I do not need you." As noted above there are three Kelsey parcels that are contiguous to the Travertine development. Those being: APN 766-110-006, APN 766-110-008, and APN 753-050-008. The 766 parcels are completely surrounded by the CVWD, BOR, and Travertine. This in effect causes those parcels to be landlocked and unviable for development. As there is no usable access through either the CVWD or BOR it is obvious that the only other option is through the Travertine property. I discussed this with Mr. Rogers during a meeting in his office on May 2nd of this year. Mr. Rogers response was, "I won't give you access unless I have to." We respectfully request that the Planning commission take note of this and require Travertine to provide proper access that is suitable for development of the 766 parcels before moving forward with their project. Lastly, there is the 753-050-008 parcel that abuts Jefferson Street south of Avenue 62. We do not see anything on the Travertine maps that show public access to that property. Again we respectfully ask the Commission to take note of this and provide any correction that may be needed. Sincerely, Timothy Kraushaar P.O. Box 300 Seal Beach, CA 90740 1146 Travertine Project Brenda O'Brien <brendagz8@icloud.com> Wed 6/5/2024 11:18 AM To:Planning WebMail <Planning@laquintaca.gov> Some people who received this message don't often get email from brendagz8@icloud.com. Learn why this is important ** 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. ** June 5, 2024 To the board members of the La Quinta Planning Commission, My husband and I own a home at 81421 Rustic Canyon Drive in the Trilogy at La Quinta Community. Two of the main reasons we purchased our home in 2015 were because 1) Avenue 62, which runs parallel behind Rustic Canyon Drive, is a dead end road which meant we would have little to no traffic and its accompanying noise behind us and 2) there is no infrastructure blocking the beautiful view of the surrounding mountains. We spend a great deal of quality time on our back patio and consider it an extension of our living space in an outdoor setting. We love and appreciate the quietness of the desert and we love the unmarred majestic view of the mountains. We are adamantly opposed to the Travertine development turning Avenue 62 into an entrance into Travertine. The idea of building a bridge over the berm in order to extend Avenue 62 is preposterous. The traffic, the noise pollution, and the air pollution that it will introduce into the environment bordering the community of Trilogy at La Quinta is unimaginable. The bridge "in the sky" with its constant vehicle crossings will look ridiculous and completely spoil the view of the mountains for a significant number of Trilogy at La Quinta residents. Please do not approve the developer's request to make Avenue 62 an entrance into Travertine. Sincerely, Brenda and Tom O'Brien 81421 Rustic Canyon Drive La Quinta, California 92253 1147 FW: Travertine Roadways Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Mon 6/3/2024 11:51 AM To:Tania Flores <tflores@laquintaca.gov> Q 0 tra CA1.11 ORL,41 # Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760-777-7067 www.laquintaca.gov From: Carolyn Winnor <cwinnor@dc.rr.com> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 11:50 AM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine Roadways ** 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 Ms. Flores My name is Carolyn Winnor I live at 81134 Barrel Cactus Rd., in Trilogy. I attended the Planning Commission (PC) meeting last Tuesday, May 28th, 2024. Based on the presentation done by Mr. Rogers and my review of the slide presentation I have some additional questions, regarding the Jefferson St and Madison St access to the property. Jefferson Street questions: 1. It appears that Mr. Rogers of the Hoffman Co. has no plans to build the Jefferson entrance until the Coral Canyon development can share in the costs. I know Coral Canyon is not being reviewed now. But has the Coral Canyon development been reviewed in the past by either the Planning Commission or approved by the PC and/or City Council? If so, can you direct me to those documents please? 2. Is there a date certain that the Hoffman Group will be required to build the Jefferson entrance? 3. Since Mr. Rogers said he won't do the Jefferson Street Extension until he partners with the Coral Canyon Developer, can the Planning Commission or City Council compel him to make the Jefferson Street Extension without Coral Canyon? Madison Street as EVA only On page 13 of the presentation it implies that the Madison Street entrance to the development will be "Emergency Evacuation route only". It was also stated at the PC meeting, the entrance 1148 will be used for Emergency Vehicles and CVWD, the usage of the road will be restricted by a gate. 1. The slide states "24' pavement built in Phase 1". Is the 24' pavement mean the road over the berm will climb to 24'? 2. Will the road design on Madison be the same as the design on 62nd Ave? 3. At what point will the road begin to climb to 24'? How many feet from 60th Avenue? 4. How many feet will the road remain at 24' before going down to ground level'? 5. Since Madison is scheduled for development in Phase 1, will Madison become the second entrance into Development until Jefferson Street is built? 6. Will the Madison entrance become restricted and gated only after the Jefferson road/entrance is completed? Looking forward to your response. Thank You, Carolyn Winnor 1149 POWERPOINT PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 25,2024 Planning Commission Meeting June 25, 2024 5:00 p.m. t a+ti� r4. Planning Commission Meeting i June 25, 2024 PH1 —Travertine Development GPA20217-0002, ZC2017-0002, SP2017-0004, TTM2017-0008, DA2021-0001, EA2017-0008 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING J U N E 25, 2024 1 4 lip'fir' R`ryJl� ' I F•— }i;{• T ar v mine �4 . Silk S•45 ~~l' 2 Proposal • Modify project master plan — 855 acres — 1,200 residential units ranging in size from large lot estates to small lot attached — 38-acre spa/hotel with 100 villas and associated amenities — 46-acre resort area with golf academy, clubhouse, and banquet restaurant — Recreational open space with parks and public trails — Natural open space for conservation Entitlements • General Plan Amendment • Zone Change • Specific Plan • Tentative Tract Map • Development Agreement • Environmental Impact Report PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 25, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING J U N E 25, 2024 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING J U N E 25, 2024 p r 11 12 m J CEQA �%- • Planning Commission makes recommendation on Draft EIR • Final EIR is prepared and sent out to commentors 10 days prior to City Council hearing Recommendation • Adopt a resolution to recommend City Council certify an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (EA2017-0008, SCH# 2018011023) for the Travertine Project and direct staff to prepare Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. • Adopt a resolution to recommend City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2017-0002, Zone Change 2017- 0002, Specific Plan 2017-0004, Tentative Tract Map 2017- 0008 (TTM 37387), and Development Agreement 2021-0001. h ' . 4 Planning Commission Meeting June 25, 2024 Staff Item: Project Updates 0. L., - r7v Le Jefferson Square Apartments .-Ing.. IFFM -_NNW 88 multifamily units }I +I'A1 fli+:J WSYI�i Apartments and �:. r - townhomes F - 3 1 } In design review One Eleven Center Monuments • Update existing monument signs • Add sic signs • In design review ir Loouinlc e Sphere of Influence Survey being prepared -- • Will send to VSR residents rot:- 171J • Will be available online Highway 111 Corridor Specific Plan Specific Plan text being drafted Code being drafte - Mitigated Negative .x�"-�4_,_,-_ :- 77 Declaration bein '= - V. ,a prepared a Recently Approved Projects • Andalusia-64 new homes • McQuaid Studio - • Rancho La Quinta Clubhouse Remodel G Projects Under Construction • Five Below • Chick Fil A • Quick Quack • Hospitality Homes • Barcelona Club (Desert Club Apt) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING J U N E 25, 2024 23 24 12 HANDOUTS PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 259 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - JUNE 25, 2024 HANDOUTS BY RESIDENT ALENA CALLIMANIS - PH1: TRAVERTINE PROJECT Order of Presentations Donna Williams Alena Callimanis Eddie Chernoff Bryan Williams Brian Levy Brenda O'Brien Chris Johns Frig Bachli Lou Smaldino June 25, 2024 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION My name is Donna Williams and I reside at 81920 Eagle Claw Drive. Dear Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chair Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, Thank you for everything you do for the City of La Quinta and its residents. My presentation is focused on the DER you are currently reviewing. One of your key responsibilities, as sited on the La Quinta website, is to serve as an advisory body to the City Council. This is what you are doing today, advising on the DER for the Travertine Development. A key tenant of the CEQA process is to take into consideration all public comment as you act in your advisory role to the City Council. Let me point out, that for the Travertine DER, you are only seeing public comment that was received in 2020 for the Notice of Preparation. You are not seeing the public comments that were received on or before December 11, 2023, which was the last day to provide comments for the Travertine DEIR. Here is my question to you. Have you at least seen the list of comments by agencies and lay people that were provided for the DER in December 2023? I believe the answer is no. If the comments have not been yet reviewed and incorporated into the FEIR for the City Council meeting, how can you possibly know if the recommendations you are making are correct? CEQA acknowledges that DEIRs can be reviewed by other city agencies before a recommendation goes to the City Council, which is the governing body that must give final approval. I know that, as Planning Commissioners, you spend a great deal of time to make sure you understand all the issues around a DER before you make a recommendation to the City Council. For Coral Mountain you evaluated the Final EIR, so you were confident in your recommendation. So, I need to ask ... how can you possibly make a recommendation to the City Council, that you are 100% confident is the right recommendation, without receiving all the public and agency comments submitted for the DEIR? I believe you cannot. Avenue 62 Elevated Roadway and Jefferson Extension Pictures Alena Callimanis 81469 Rustic Canyon Dr. A Fabric Truck Viewed from Jasmine Court — brown is 6 feet higher roadway, white is truckbed, green is sod being delivered Avenue 62 is narrow _. � A... � \ - � � � . � < � ■ f . � . �_. _ \ . 4 � /�: Imo= : -^ . . Jefferson Extension Jefferson Extension Please move the elevated roadway on Avenue 62 as the primary entrance to the Jefferson extension as the primary entrance Eddie Chernoff - 81223 Agave Ct. Lexan and Polycarbonate Info Lexan is a brand name for polycarbonate. All Lexan is polycarbonate, but not all polycarbonate is Lexan. A&C Plastics is a plastics manufacturer In Houston producing pohrcarbonate since 1973 Lexan is a brand name and not the name of the material itself; the term "Lexan" has simply become synonymous with said material in the same way that Band-Aid has for bandages. That branding was formulated in 1960 by General Electric (GE), the company responsible for pioneering American development and production of the material. Bayer, meanwhile, has been creating the material under the name of Merlon (later Makrolon) since 1958; both companies discovered their version of the plastic within a week of each other and agreed to cross -license its manufacture so as to allow further development on both sides of the Atlantic. Lexan is a polycarbonate resin thermoplastic. (Problems with polycarbonate] • Easier to scratch than glass and some other thermoplastics • More expensive than glass and some other thermoplastics • Poor clarity, cannot be polished to restore clarity • Can be yellowed over time by UV rays • Low level of resistance to abrasive cleaners and surfaces • Can be dented easily The Madison Group is the recognized leader in plastics engineering. Over the course of three decades The Madison Group has_focused_on polymeric materials. Because of the molecular structure of polycarbonate, the polymer is susceptible to yellowing through a variety of degradation mechanisms. Discoloration of polycarbonate can occur through oxidation, either during processing or as a result of elevated temperature exposure in air. Yellowing can also take place through sterilization, such as autoclaving, radiation, or ethylene oxide. Further, polycarbonate is highly susceptible to yellowing through ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure. When polycarbonate is exposed to ultraviolet radiation as sunlight, yellowing can take place rapidly. This discoloration is principally a surface phenomenon, approximately 25 micrometers deep, due to the penetration depth of the UV radiation into the polycarbonate. The effects of UV exposure, as well as oxidation and hydrolytic degradation, can be assessed through accelerated aging followed by color evaluation and physicaVmechanical testing. The image below shows the progressive yellowing of a polycarbonate resin, formulated without a UV stabilizer, through 1000 hours exposure in a QUV chamber. The UV resistance of polycarbonate can be improved through compounding with additive UV stabilizers. As an alternative, the resistance can be developed as a protective coating. 0 25 54 1.00 300 350 SO4 750 1000 s i F o +&C�—. CH3 &—O_C_O + 3 1� by OHOH / \ ��H.3 2,2'-Oihydroxytriphenyl CH3 4-cumylphenol OH 0 OH O OH D / \ i \ I Co. \ 2, 2'-dihydroxyphenone Phenyl C►+� salicylate Saiicylate derivative The lifespan of solid UV filtering polycarbonate sheets in outdoor use can vary depending on a variety of factors such as the specific formulation of the material, the quality of the UV protection, the intensity of UV exposure, environmental conditions, and maintenance practices. In general, high -quality UV filtering polycarbonate sheets are designed to withstand outdoor exposure for many years. Over time, exposure to UV radiation can lead to degradation of polycarbonate materials. This degradation typically manifests as yellowing, loss of transparency, brittleness, and reduced impact resistance. This degradation is primarily a cosmetic issue and does not necessarily mean that the material has become structurally deficient or unsafe. To prolong the service life of UV filtering polycarbonate sheets in outdoor use, you can take the following maintenance measures: 1. Regular Cleaning: Keeping the sheets clean by periodically washing them with a mild soap and water solution can help prevent the buildup of dirt, grime, and other contaminants that can accelerate degradation. 2. UV Protective Coatings: Applying UV protective coatings or films specifically designed for polycarbonate can help enhance the material's resistance to UV radiation and prolong its lifespan. 3. Shading: Providing shading or using UV -blocking structures can help reduce direct exposure to sunlight and mitigate the effects of UV radiation on the polycarbonate sheets. 4. Avoiding Harsh Chemicals: Avoid using harsh chemicals, solvents, or abrasive materials for cleaning as these can damage the surface of the polycarbonate sheets. S. Regular Inspection: Periodically inspecting the sheets for signs of degradation, such as yellowing or hazing, and addressing any issues promptly can help prevent further deterioration. 6. While it is possible to maintain UV filtering polycarbonate sheets for longer service life through proper care and maintenance, eventually, all materials exposed to outdoor conditions will experience some degree of degradation. if the sheets become significantly hazy or brittle despite maintenance efforts, it may be time to consider replacing them to ensure continued performance and safety. NOAA UV Levels compare Atlantic City UV Index United States i NJ i Atlantic Count, L1V Indox 1-pay S-pay Mon 24 Jun 111e :' . ju Wed 26 Jun 11+ Lxtreme 8+. Very High 6r High 0 Graph Plots Open in Graphs 0j UV Forecast Coos Bay UV Index 0 United States i OR i Coos county I � t-bay 9-pay UV Index Mon 74 .lun 11 y. Extreme 8. Very High G High 3+ Moderate La Quinta UV Index United States i CA t Riverside County UV Index t-Day 3-nay Mon 24 Jun Tue 25 Jun Wed 26 Jun 1 1+ Extreme 8+ Very High 6+ High 3+ Moderate 0 Graph Plots Open in Graphs > .. Dtw tpdksv yes .U?ws:1rK*=O WIn tom, ►xn1 rqt: lipm paAUW n dvo crorW N to Wei V t o e+rr07*d Irv" #rry wa rtr. erg Gt onwv twppsr tauvrom W4 CA"*^ eft.eteg am •mr j a a, rroko + sgrvum d%mf4A r tar rwgavo fw-% n 14M► alch hrlsw warq June 25, 2024 My name is Bryan Williams and I reside at 91920 Rustic Canyon Drive in La Quinta. Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chair Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, I am here to address Attachment A which includes the information from Urban Crossroads on the future noise impacts from the elevated roadway over the dike to local residents. Urban Crossroads states that there will be no impact. I am here to disprove the results. In the original DEIR traffic study, Urban Crossroads measured the ambient noise at location L7. L7 is located near Avenue 62 near existing homes on Rustic Canyon. The daytime dBA levels were 49.8 and the nighttime levels were 48.2. That level is considered QUIET by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). FICON developed guidance that considers the ambient noise level and Project -generated noise increases. Please look in your handout at Table 4.12-5 which I copied from the DEIR, which summarizes the FICON Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receivers. You will see in this table, that if the ambient noise levels are 49.8 and 48.2 without project level noise, if the project adds 5dBA's or more of noise, it is now considered a potentially significant impact. Table 4.12-5 Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receiver ithout Project Noise Level Illotential Significant Impact < 60 dBA 5 dBA or more 60 - 65 dBA 3 dBA or more > 65 dBA 1.5 dBA or more Now if you look at Table 3 in Attachment A for the new noise study by Urban Crossroads for the evaluation of future noise on the roadway over the dike, you will see Urban Crossroads calculated the future noise levels at the homes on Jasmine Court and Rustic Canyon are an average of 52.9, 56.7, 59.9, 58.71 55.8, 52.1, 54.8, 55.0 57.7, 57.2 dBA. You will see that all but two of the locations, exceeded the FICON Significant Noise Impact level of over 5 DBA which means, per FICON, the noise impact is considered significant. The two houses that did not have a change of 5 dBAs were the furthest away from the top of the Dike. TABLE 3: AVENUE 62 EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE Receiver Location' Address Av. 62 Traffic Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)z Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA CNEW Noise Level Standards Exceeded?4 RI 81272 Jasmine Ct. 52.9 65 No R2 81260 Jasmine Ct. 56.7 65 No R3 81271 Jasmine Ct. 59.9 65 No R4 81283 Jasmine Ct. 58.7 65 No R5 81295 Jasmine Ct. 55.8 65 No R6 81307 Jasmine Ct. 52.1 65 No R7 81319 Jasmine Ct. 54.8 65 No R8 81337 Rustic Cyn. Dr. 55.0 65 No R9 81349 Rustic Cyn. Rd. 57.7 65 No R10 81361 Rustic Cyn. Rd. 57.2 65 No 'See Exhibit A for the receiver locations. ' Future Avenue 62 exterior traffic noise levels with crossing over Dike 94. 3 City of La Quinta General Plan Noise Element Policy N-1.2) ' Do the estimated Avenue 62 traffic noise levels exceed the noise level standards? Therefore, you cannot say that the noise level standard is not exceeded. Per FICON, the noise level impact is significant. Therefore, noise impacts for these residences cannot be mitigated. And by the way, this does not take into consideration the impact of the elevated roadway, which is no longer blocked by the 6 foot Trilogy wall. Today you can hear the cars and trucks going to the Trilogy Maintenance Yard. And this is with the 6 foot wall around Trilogy. Since the road will now be elevated, we will no longer have the six foot wall for sound attenuation. That was not studied by Urban Crossroads. Noise impact is significant for residents. You cannot certify the DER. Brian levy - reference documentation on sound Sound travels faster in warmer air, so the sound waves are refracted upward, away from the ground. Various atmospheric conditions can cause a temperature inversion, with air temperature increasing with height. This causes some of the sound energy from a source near the ground to be refracted back toward the ground. https://www.sigmapisigma.org/the-sps-observer/winter/2015/sound-reasons- answers#:w:text=Sound%20travels%20faster%20i n%20warmer,refracted%20back%20toward %20the%20ground. <><><><> During the day, as warm air rises and cool air sinks, sound waves bend upward into the atmosphere and away from our ears so we don't hear it as much. Once the sun sets and the night air cools, an interesting thing happens —a warm layer of air above the cool night air causes sound waves to bend back toward the Earth.Feb 15, 2024 https://www.clickorlando.com/weather/2024/02/15/heres-how-weather-turns-highway- sounds-up-or- down/#:-:text=During%20the%20day%2C%20as%20warm,bend%20back%20towa rd%20the %20Earth. <><><><> From a point source, sound travels outward radially. As it impacts surfaces, it is reflected back into the space or absorbed. The amplitude of the sound you hear, as well as other properties, are determined by whether you are hearing the initial sound, or a reflected version of it.Dec 11, 2020. https://com mercial-acoustics.com/how-sound- travels/#:-:text=From%20a%20point%20source%2C%20sound,a%20reflected%20version%20 of%201t. <><><><><> The sound travels both directions evenly, radiating from the source (speakers). However, it is typical for the noise to be worse for the area below you. This is because your speakers are coupled to the floor by gravity.Jan 27, 2011 https://www.quora.com/Why-does-sound-seem-to-travel-u Award-more-easily-than-it-does- horizontally#:^':text=The%20sound%20travels%20both%20directions,to%20the%20floor%20 by%20gravity. <><><> https://www.phy.cuhk.edu. hk/phyworld/iq/sound_night/sound_night_e. htm I#:^':text=You% 20may%20wonder%2C%20it%20is,to%20refraction%20of%20sound%20waves I You may wonder, it is because it is quieter at night than in the daytime. Therefore it is easy to hear the sound far away. However, it is only one of the reasons. Actually, sound transmits farther at night may be related to refraction of sound waves! If the speakers are lifted up on stands, or are flown above the audience's heads, the sound will cary to the back of the audience. It travels faster downhill because it will run into rocks and bounce off going uphill.Aug 4, 2017 https://www.quora.com/Does-sound-travel-better-up-a-mountain-hi II-slope-than-down-it-i- e-can-speech-from-downslope-be-heard-farther-away-than-from- upslope#:" :text=lf%20the%20speakers%20are%201ifled,the%20back%20of%20the%20audie nce.&text=lt%20travels%20faster%20downhI11%20because,and%20bounce%2ooH%2ogoing%2ouphi I 4 y r+ � �' +�. ..-�••y� +pro ti. � dir � � �.- -'v •�r.Jli`1:+'.y „,n�}..,�4 ,r}h-�\v — ,"_" -.k� f~•A��q �*.S-.Tr•+i��w+�r�r�+J1� .... + '' .�." ". ��++.. �.ry ti', .t '�ALc�+•i'. •'_A-,;,Yr'Ca. - .: y "_ -. 1 {?�y I�L�. .`"_f•���*+.'}�R� i�'1 ��raCi�.�' feu �.fiW� :�.. ."y�� �-J�]�N Yl��]'xY.�-ii�='lY.".•."'.'t ,�' ;� f•zf...-. ,iL 'w,,.�h �'� . � � ' �"i'� � _ —, j` . 1 M1 '�M1�r.'+� L. kS7 S j�� .l5`��•�'}�. `. ,'� �',.J ' � y+.15.�+-' �,, ', �'� t" ' ;�r'.�`Y �_'. -. ti. �', _ _r�. �''••ay. �` - -'�:i �'t_6�y-'r' rYK` _ `y �T :s j� ">1: .i. FLL-}Y' -.r.•� r=4�..�9 y `� �w.�..i{"'S,, x, ._�`�' }r" ��+�='.5'�• r"'}�ti';cl,��F,-.,�'�:ia{r��;" f.f�"".'`�`. -##.•.l�a{�� i4R+�i_�r-'"4 �`�-�k2��.�f.:" r�.'f.��_' �' �M1�l i. � ��:"'4i1 ar `',�`.»tr.•��{:; '. =.'sry• 'ft.` ��`- i � it �'�..�. t #" k � �:l •i June 25, 2024 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION My name is Brenda O'Brien and I reside at 81421 Rustic Canyon Drive in La Quinta. Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chair Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, Thank you for your service to the City of La Quinta I am here to address aesthetics and noise along Avenue 62. In considering aesthetics, as you know, in order to provide trucks and cars the required slope for Avenue 62 so it ends six feet above the current height of Dike 4, there must be a gradual upward increase of the roadway. Therefore, the elevated roadway must start at least 200 feet before Dike 4. So I and my fellow residents will be seeing this elevated roadway every day, bringing trucks and cars above the 6 foot wall surrounding Trilogy. We will be experiencing, as sited in the DEIR traffic study, when the project is first open to tourists and residents, 6000 vehicles everyday going over the Dike. We will be seeing the whole vehicle or truck, minus the couple of feet at the bottom of the vehicle, due to the side wall for the elevated roadway. There is nowhere in the Coachella Valley where I have seen a purposefully built elevated roadway that will bring vehicles on a 36 foot elevated roadway, so close to a development. I am also including in my presentation a picture of a truck starting to go up the elevated road to the dike. It is a 40 foot truck with sod in the flat bed. While my friends were a bit challenged getting it up, it makes it obvious that we will be seeing the trucks and cars. There will be constant traffic motion. Today I can hear the cars and trucks going to the Trilogy Maintenance Yard. And that is even with the 6 foot wall. Now I will no longer have the six foot wall protecting me from car and truck noise because the elevated roadway needs to start rising on Avenue 62 around 200 feet before the Dike. Urban Crossroads did not study that. You cannot mitigate these aesthetic issues. This is not consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. June 25, 2024 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION My name is Chris Jones and I reside at 60523 White Sage Drive in La Quinta. Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chair Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hemandez, McCune and Tyerman, I am here today to talk about lighting on the elevated roadway that will cross the Dike at Avenue fit. It makes sense to us that there will have to be lighting to ensure safety of drivers and pedestrians and bicyclists. Nowhere have we seen lighting for the elevated roadway addressed in the DER and how that will impact us. What about the effects of lights of cars and trucks from 42 to 50 feet high shining down on the homes of Trilogy residents as they cross this roadway. This will cause lights flashing into our windows and yards. Where is this aesthetically addressed in the DEIR? Again, cannot be mitigated. Thanks. Fritz Bachli - TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRAFT EIR SCH* 2018011023 LEAD AGENCY: The City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 APPLICANT: Hofmann Land Development Co. 3000 Oak Road, Suite 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 PREPARER: MSA Consulting Inc. 34200 Bob Hope Drive Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 October 2023 P RAW \ ! i 11 ! ► i ! ► s i ! ! Table 4.3.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status Carlfomb Federal Pollutant Ave�� Period Standards r3< :a(- In„ h'3rop.1 W;Nidr�No?) arbor. 1-hour 0.09 w. ;180;Or11) g•hrYAr ii:,A) Wn ji3l Wlr.' Annudl kitivnrk 0.03Tarr'57;taj'n) +ran _,_ 14cur Uspp:rrl334;w.n, $h�'uri 3.Opp;rtl0r;s�ln�') motNt ? 01 1 hour Sulfur D*x de I lour 15rJ4f ; 4 .,ur 30•dar srrrege Cad (P6) WIMP 3dmpnih 20 Dorn 123 ark/m'j Attainment Status ` Standards .... I Attahtmem Status iGiai,a7nTrcii; i iiltfldit.11nlntll Altainmtlni I 0.25 DDm At'alrn�:; 0•� rpR � I kttaurriaCt+t 0.0�4 Ppm 1137 k;fm'i f Pf" ilral Ri:lm'} UrxlaSSME ! �'.:td�.rrxnt 01.00P;mI7RA'.g,m'I � 4 pp n lW mg1wi Wi>tivSSiiiE�!' 35 porn (40 rrclm') Am'' mu nt 0.075 pprn Ilr�i�igi#i{� 015 U,�N, +tttbilr?nt myimMr 14 F.aur I 50 HUM' 150 UP. $ Partrul3;P �.--tta�mrrr l�ona:tairmerr frarrr Ar,s„a 20 t Q/rrtr � (PM10) :;at wtr Man Fme 24 Pour — 35 }tK)m: ,, FKvculite i? � +, tl.l�'I'rlihpCli; ^ ;Jy:`13' Ati4ir mer,; 1Jxi;, 6zdr Alatter S-9a, nit � 1911g�r,3 I! I Attainment t�.tJrr`,111Rt3ri��.t�hh'tar�FNµ�ti�rafll��+_-r»».islt�k'rt:'yt1A•L�rdJJ.i•:WL»';6�j.�:cskti'�:.C�+i]H�:1t»i'1�r:i':Eilrr.5rrr�ti�i.Y�1'X tty.•,:�:r�,>,t•���.a�,:���''Sti}uk�H,r', r,�:c�x:�Y,}�:t�a4-ne Attachment A FRITZ E. BACHLI. 6/5/2024 ITEM 8E. Subject: Contact: Coachella Valley Association of Governments Executive Committee June 3, 2024 STAFF REPORT: Lingering Air Quality Concerns & Coordination with South Coast Air Quality Management District Tom Kirk, Executive Director (tkirk@cvag.org) Since the definition of exceeding the Federal 24-dour PM10 standard is 150 ug/m3, Mecca and Indio both more than doubled that federal standard. However, the most stunning data was the 24-hour average from 3:00 P.M. April 24 to 2:00 P.M. April 25 of 492.6 ug/m3, more than three times the federal standard. The federal standard is only measured from midnight to midnight, but this exceedance represents a serious health threat to everyone. Currently the EPA has primary and secondary standards for PM- 2.5 (annual average Standards with levels of 12.0 ug/m3 and 15.0 ug/m3, respectively 24 hours standards with 98 percentile forms and levels of 35 ug/m3. However, other resources indicate alarming trends and CVAG staff have heard from many partners, including the Convention & Visitors Bureau, about the potential long-term impacts. CVAG staff also will be participating in a collaboration led by the Desert Healthcare District/ Foundation to establish metrics and address health concerns related to air quality. As aforementioned, the DHCD effort kicks off on June 4. CVAG's air quality consultant, Emily Nelson, has been assisting with these efforts, including reaching out to the state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, who has expressed interest in conducting a preliminary epidemiological study to see if local health effects have been more severe since the storm event in August. These efforts could help with long-term strategies to understand the current health impacts of poor air quality. However, immediate action, such as soil stabilization and other dust control methods, is needed to avoid the detrimental effects to public health due to increased exposure as well as economic impacts to our regional economy. Attachment B FRITZ E. BACHU, 6/5/2024 Travertine Project/ Manning Commission Meeting, 6/25/2024, City Hall Meeting / La Quinta. TOPIC: AIR QUALITY REPORT BY: Test Equipment Improvised by 7, Fritz E. Bachli with Dylos 1700 Particle Counter with Data Collection Qeo)E oral &isice�_ r4Ai bOMBOr19C1 F'I2 E. E-ejI �nrt+wr�urld Srb++Fi 1MR-okwa Maragruav tQnwaw tS06 Ffa &wo a,be Ll W-lo 602M Ch., U JA MM XN454 - kL-mwWAgrral tan Oak How did I get to the topic of Air Quality? I did work myself several times through the EIR trying to find out which is the topic of highest concerns for the City and what is the priority of the taxpayers in terms of Quality of Life issues in La Quinta and the Coachella Valley in general? The Overview of the Executive Summary of the Travertine EIR identifies four areas of Controversy known to the lead agency, including issues pointed to by other agencies and the public like myself. The circulation period, it appears, did not bring up significant concerns as pointed out in the EIR. What caught my interest is that Public agencies raised the issue why does SCAQMD required air quality matters to be dealt with under the Cal. EE Mod. to determine Impact of projects like the Travertine (Section 4.3 Air Quality). I found this directive unexpected and inconsistent with the Table under Section 4.3.1 Air Quality? In conclusion, I got the impression that significant and unavoidable specific impacts to air quality, were identified in the EIR and would be significant and unavoidable. But with some ingenuity and mitigation everything can to some extent be mitigated! I got the insecure feeling from the Planning commission that out of site — out of mind? BUT LET'S TAKE A MINUTE: How is the outside world "TODAY" looking at the Air Quality issues in the Coachella Valley: The air quality and the noise impact on Trilogy on three sides of the community will be creating an environmental overload! ISSUE: THE DESERT SUN, dated 6/23/2024. Topic: Is the Valley's air quality getting worse? Scientists are using new tools to find out? The SCAQMD, Deputy Executive states: We take it very seriously if the public is telling us there is a problem and we can't see it! Where is the disconnect? Scientific findings with many leaders in the Coachella Valley have not sat well. What they are finding are the significant threats to the region's economy and way of life and resident's physical and mental Health. Those leaders say it's urgent to address the problem. Tourists telling business bwners that the air quality let them hesitant to return as well as an uptick in children under the age of 3 showing up at hospitals with new asthma symptoms. ISSUE: CEVAG STAFF REPORT/ DATED 6/3/2024. Topic: Lingering air quality concerns and coordination with South Coast Air Quality Management Districts by Executive Director. Since the definition of exceeding the Federal Standard for PM-10 is150 ug/m3, Mecca and Indio both more than doubled the Federal Standard. The most stunning data of 492.6 ug/m3 was the 24-hour average more than three times the federal standard. Purposely repeated! This exceedance represents a serious health threat to everyone in particular young children as well as Senior Citizens(Copy of Staff Report is attached) ISSUE: EPA ANNOUNCEMENT: 2/7/24. The EPA announced the agency's proposed rule reducing the primary PM 2.5 from 12 ug/m3 to 9 ug/m3! Page 2 IQAir is a Swiss Technology company that empowers other individuals, organizations and governments to approve air quality through information and collaboration. The EPA sets May 6, 2024 as the landmark date when the finalized rule officially takes a significant shift in how air quality is monitored and communicated to the public. The EPA announced the agency's proposed rule change reducing the primary annual National Ambient Air Quality Standard from 12 ug/m3 to 9 ug/m3. The revised standards will help keep authorities accountable and committed to protecting people from greater PM — 2.5 exposure. In terms of discrepancies of Test Results from the CEVAG Report mentioned and confirmed for the first time, I have noticed and reported these differences since the beginning of 2017. The present reporting of Air Quality is useful statistical data but is not giving Information to the public about Air Quality in our Valley useful to protect resident's and their guest's lives? MEASURING OF SURFACE PARTICLES WITH A DYLOS PARTICLE COUNTER BY FRITZ E. BACHLI WHAT'S THE AIR QUALITY ANYWHERE: INSIDE, OUTSIDE AT ANYTIME! For my tests, I am using a Battery operated Dylos 1700 Air Quality Monitor. It is an accurate laser quality counter. Leading research universities / institutions monitor indoor and outdoor particle pollution. YouTube provides a collection of information regarding the technology of the test equipment and it's surprising comparison of data with SCAQMD test stations in the Valley which are 7 miles and 20 miles from the Travertine location? In a special video the CEO of the Dylos Company, a former AQMD Director, explains the operating procedure of the Monitor and the comparative test results with AQMD's stationary BAM equipment. Here are some of my typical findings about Air Quality measurements on 4/23/2024, at 6.45 AM with a Dylos 1700: Location: Fire Barrel Drive / Inside of House: PM-2.5, PM-1 0, / Outside on Patio: PM-2.5, PM-1 0, 25.8 ug/m3 J 104.3 ug/ m3 1 115.5 ug/m3 617.2 ug/m3 T EIR under Table 4.3.1 states that Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status for PM-10 is currently designated as serious nonattainment area. PM 2.5 is listed with Unclassified /Attainment. California is listed a threshold Limits of 12 ug/m3. (Refer to Table 4.3.1 of the EIR stating the threshold limits.) Page 3 In January of 2018, 1 discovered a press release entitled:" I put a "Dylos" Air Quality Monitor on my bike and went looking for smog". A new project in Toronto / Canada is keeping tabs on the City's air quality. Monitoring air quality is important for one thing, pollution can trigger health problems like Asthma and Heart Arrhythmias. But checking the air quality of an entire city is a massive undertaking. While the Province does have its own air monitoring stations, 39 around Ontario / Canada including four in Toronto, and that's why "citizen science" comes in. The government isn't giving us a complete enough picture with values we can use to protect ourselves from the poisonous air. BACK TO TRAVERTINE: The EIR Table 4.3.1 has to be reviewed and sense and order has to be brought into the topic of threshold limits. We need realistic numbers which can be monitored, controlled as compliant or noncompliant. After hundreds of Air Quality Measurements, I fully support CVAG findings that the present threshold limits have to be examined before the Travertine project can be approved and moved forward. The present information about Air Quality by the press, on TV radio etc. are useless for the population for quick and reliable health information purposes. They are useful for statistical reviews and performance comparisons. Air Quality is a very complex topic and I am not surprised that during the NOP phase only a few comment letters were filed. The recommended reading will bring you front line information of the latest Status on this discussion in the Coachella Valley. I also ask our City Government to follow closely the Rules and Regulations and make sure that growth of our City is approved according of the laws and understand that a possible environmental overload of the community might have a negative impact on the financial performance of the city and the region's business income. A SENIOR CITIZEN COMMUNITY ON THREE SIDES WITH 50 MILES SPEED LIMIT ACCESS ROADS AND A ROW OF HOMES WITH A BERM OF SAND ADJACENT TO THE BACKYARD IS IRRESPONSIBLE PLANNING AND TRAVERTINE NEEDS TO BE REJECTED! Fritz E. Bachli, 6/28/2024 J . ,- June 25, 2024 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION My name is Lou Smaldino and I reside at 81845 La Paz Court. Chairperson Nieto, Vice Chair Hassett, Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hernandez, McCune and Tyerman, My presentation is focused on a comments made by the Applicant. The first comment I want to address is by Mark Rogers that he made during his presentation. He spoke about how Trilogy residents should be happy that the 500 room hotel that would have been by 62 has now changed into a boutique hotel closer to Coral Mountain. I would like to address that by saying Trilogy is built out. You proposed that hotel in 1995 before Trilogy was built. You would not have received approval for it today because Trilogy would have been impacted. And if you had built your hotel first, I know that Shea, the Trilogy developer, would have changed his plans to avoid putting homes anywhere near the Avenue 62 elevated Roadway. The second thing I would like to address is that the applicant does not want to move the main entrance from Avenue 62 to the Jefferson Street extension. The applicant said he wanted to share costs of that Jefferson Street extension with the developer of Coral Canyon. If you read the DEIR and if you listened to the applicant presentation, you know that there is nothing wrong with building the Jefferson extension. If you have gone on top of the dike at the end of Avenue 62, you would know that it will be incredibly complex to build that elevated roadway, also adding in bike lane and walking lanes. The existing road going up the dike is about 24 feet at its narrowest. To build out the elevated roadway support structure, starting down Avenue 62 and up over the dike, and to still preserve the integrity of the dike, will be extremely complex and extremely costly. If you eliminate Avenue 62 as the main access, the applicant will save tons of money and can easily fund by himself the Jefferson Street extension. And finally, the applicant addresses the Fire Code as a reason to have Avenue 62. Here is the information contained in the Travertine documentation. Riverside County Fire requires two access points to the Project site during both Project construction and Project operation to ensure adequate fire and emergency services (e.g., paramedics) to the site. (DEIR, pp. 4.14-19-and 4.14-20.) The extension of the existing terminus of Ave 62 west of Monroe Street and into the Project property has been approved by Riverside County Fire through the Fire Access Master Plan (FCMP2019-0008) as one of the two required points of access to the Project site. For this reason alone, elimination of the Avenue 62 crossing over Dike No. 4 is not feasible. This says "is not feasible". Feasible is not "mandatory". Why is it not feasible if now Jefferson extension is one of the two required points of access of access, with Madison as the Emergency Vehicle Access and the second required point of access. You have seen and heard all the information about why the Avenue 62 elevated roadway is so against what the City of La Quinta prides itself on. Commissioners, at the March 28, 2023 meeting you all agreed the three story apartment buildings for the La Quinta Village Apartments were wrong. You heard here last meeting that the elevated roadway and vehicle traffic is much taller than the three story apartments you stopped. Commission Guerrero, in the same meeting you stated that the City Council had just reestablished its Core Values, and two of the five had to do with aesthetics and beauty of the City. The only thing you as Planning Commissioners should do, is to recommend to the City Council that they put into the Conditions of Approval that the main entrance for Travertine must be the Jefferson Street Extension. Thank you very much. WRITTEN COMMENT PHl: TRAVERTINE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 25,2024 Tania Flores From: Jack Buchan <jbuchan3@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 8:28 AM To: Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Some people who received this message don't often get email from jbuchan3@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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. Wow... please consider the view/tranquility of the mountains that would be polluted by the sight of an elevated entrance and continuous vehicle traffic. That height is higher than any building around. Please vote for Jefferson street and low level/low visual impact entrance. IM John Buchan Trilogy Resident I From: Judy Burk To: Cheri Flores Subject: Travertine Development Date: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:50:25 PM [You don't often get email from jburk92253@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] ** 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 do not approve of the Monroe/62 nd street overpass as it will greatly affect our community. We request that the Jefferson Street option be used instead. Jim & Judy Burk 61702 Toro Canyon Way La Quinta Sent from my iPad Tania Flores From: JERRE DIXON <dixsno@aol.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:40 AM To: Cheri Flores Cc: Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine access [Some people who received this message don't often get email from dixsno@aol.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] ** 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 Ms. Flores; am a homeowner in Trilogy, between 60th and 62nd Avenues, just East of the planned development of Travertine. I understand Travertine is seeking access for both construction and permanent access from Monroe Street West across the berm (Dike #4). 1 also understand the access route will require an elevated roadway over the berm since the dike cannot be breached or notched for access. As a homeowner, I am opposed to such access, view blocking, pollution and vehicle traffic when alternate access routes are possible. An extension of Jefferson, whether to the West of Coral Mountain or otherwise, would provide both construction and permanent access to Travertine without taking away the views of Trilogy residents and subjecting them to pollution from dust, noise and traffic exhaust. I understand the Travertine developer opposed that access route in the meeting of May 28, 2024, but I must ask you in the planning department whether such opposition is justified or is just a concern with greater cost. Planned developments certainly need to consider cost, but that often is not significant when considering the burden on other communities. Here the burden on Trilogy at La Quinta is significant. Please accept my objection to the proposed access route from Monroe West on 62nd over Dike#4 in writing via this email, since I am not able to attend the scheduled June 25, 2024 next meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission. Thank you for your considerate attention. Jerre W Dixon 61634 Tulare Lane La Quinta, CA 92253 (303) 929-2431 Sent from my iPad Tania Flores From: Kevin Wenger <kwenger@telus.net> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:39 AM To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Cc: Monica Wenger Subject: Please do not approve the Travertine development as proposed IYou don't often get email from kwenger@telus.net. Learn why this is important 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 All, My wife Monica and I have owned property in Trilogy at LaQuinta since 2007 and are very concerned about the the planned points of ingress and egress for the proposed Travertine development. To be clear, we completely support the development but do not support the construction of a temporary and/or permanent roadway over Dike #4 at Avenue 62. If built this roadway will significantly impact the quiet enjoyment of our community by all residents and guests. Since a veryviable, less costly and less disruptive alternative is available to the developer, that being the construction of access roadways on the future extension of Jefferson Street, only with this being part of the proposal should the City of LaQuinta consider approving the development application. Thank you in advance for considering the quality of life of the more than 1200 home owners in Trilogy at LaQuinta. Kevin & Monica Wenger c: 780.983.8797 Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine proposal a Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta Q"tra 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph.760-777-7067 CALIFORNIA I www.laquintaca.gov From: David Gould <david@gouldcollegeplanning.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 11:54 AM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine proposal You don't often get email from david@souldcollegeplanning.com. Learn why this is important 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 do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and when complete operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extensonf David Gould 61290 Fire Barrel Drive LQ CA 92253 1 Tania Flores From: Kirsten Gould <kdmgould@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:42 PM To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Project You don't often get email from kdmgould@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important 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 do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and, when complete, operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. We do not want our precious Trilogy lifestyle affected in such a negative way. Kirsten Gould 61290 Fire Barrel Drive Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine development a Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta Q"tra 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph.760-777-7067 CALIFORNIA I www.laquintaca.gov From: J Jones <mgmtservicesgroup@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 10:54 AM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine development You don't often get email from mgmtservicesgroup@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 Ms. Flores, I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed elevated roadway on Avenue 62 as the primary entrance for the Travertine development project. As a homeowner in Trilogy at La Quinta, I am horrified by the possible negative impacts of such an elevated roadway! The thought of looking at our beautiful mountains and seeing (and hearing) traffic is just appalling. I would urge you, please, to insist on the original Jefferson/ Avenue 58 entrance. Thank you very much. Kindest regards, James Jones 1 Tania Flores From: JERRY KONZEN <jerrykonzen@cox.net> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 3:18 PM To: Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from jerrykonzen@cox.net. Learn why this is important 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 Trilogy at Ave 60 & Monroe and I do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and when complete operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension to reduce the impact to Trilogy Residents. Thanks for the consideration. Jerry Konzen 81629 Ulrich LaQuinta, Ca 92672 Tania Flores From: Jack Buchan <jbuchan3@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 8:28 AM To: Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Some people who received this message don't often get email from jbuchan3@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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. Wow... please consider the view/tranquility of the mountains that would be polluted by the sight of an elevated entrance and continuous vehicle traffic. That height is higher than any building around. Please vote for Jefferson street and low level/low visual impact entrance. Z John Buchan Trilogy Resident 1 From: Judy Burk To: Cheri Flores Subject: Travertine Development Date: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:50:25 PM [You don't often get email from jburk92253@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] ** 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 do not approve of the Monroe/62 nd street overpass as it will greatly affect our community. We request that the Jefferson Street option be used instead. Jim & Judy Burk 61702 Toro Canyon Way La Quinta Sent from my iPad Tania Flores From: JERRE DIXON <dixsno@aol.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:40 AM To: Cheri Flores Cc: Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine access [Some people who received this message don't often get email from dixsno@aol.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] ** 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 Ms. Flores; am a homeowner in Trilogy, between 60th and 62nd Avenues, just East of the planned development of Travertine. I understand Travertine is seeking access for both construction and permanent access from Monroe Street West across the berm (Dike #4). 1 also understand the access route will require an elevated roadway over the berm since the dike cannot be breached or notched for access. As a homeowner, I am opposed to such access, view blocking, pollution and vehicle traffic when alternate access routes are possible. An extension of Jefferson, whether to the West of Coral Mountain or otherwise, would provide both construction and permanent access to Travertine without taking away the views of Trilogy residents and subjecting them to pollution from dust, noise and traffic exhaust. I understand the Travertine developer opposed that access route in the meeting of May 28, 2024, but I must ask you in the planning department whether such opposition is justified or is just a concern with greater cost. Planned developments certainly need to consider cost, but that often is not significant when considering the burden on other communities. Here the burden on Trilogy at La Quinta is significant. Please accept my objection to the proposed access route from Monroe West on 62nd over Dike#4 in writing via this email, since I am not able to attend the scheduled June 25, 2024 next meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission. Thank you for your considerate attention. Jerre W Dixon 61634 Tulare Lane La Quinta, CA 92253 (303) 929-2431 Sent from my iPad Tania Flores From: Kevin Wenger <kwenger@telus.net> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:39 AM To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Cc: Monica Wenger Subject: Please do not approve the Travertine development as proposed IYou don't often get email from kwenger@telus.net. Learn why this is important 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 All, My wife Monica and I have owned property in Trilogy at LaQuinta since 2007 and are very concerned about the the planned points of ingress and egress for the proposed Travertine development. To be clear, we completely support the development but do not support the construction of a temporary and/or permanent roadway over Dike #4 at Avenue 62. If built this roadway will significantly impact the quiet enjoyment of our community by all residents and guests. Since a veryviable, less costly and less disruptive alternative is available to the developer, that being the construction of access roadways on the future extension of Jefferson Street, only with this being part of the proposal should the City of LaQuinta consider approving the development application. Thank you in advance for considering the quality of life of the more than 1200 home owners in Trilogy at LaQuinta. Kevin & Monica Wenger c: 780.983.8797 Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine proposal a Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta Q"tra 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph.760-777-7067 CALIFORNIA I www.laquintaca.gov From: David Gould <david@gouldcollegeplanning.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 11:54 AM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine proposal You don't often get email from david@souldcollegeplanning.com. Learn why this is important 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 do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and when complete operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extensonf David Gould 61290 Fire Barrel Drive LQ CA 92253 1 Tania Flores From: Kirsten Gould <kdmgould@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:42 PM To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Project You don't often get email from kdmgould@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important 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 do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and, when complete, operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. We do not want our precious Trilogy lifestyle affected in such a negative way. Kirsten Gould 61290 Fire Barrel Drive Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine development a Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta Q"tra 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph.760-777-7067 CALIFORNIA I www.laquintaca.gov From: J Jones <mgmtservicesgroup@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 10:54 AM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine development You don't often get email from mgmtservicesgroup@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 Ms. Flores, I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed elevated roadway on Avenue 62 as the primary entrance for the Travertine development project. As a homeowner in Trilogy at La Quinta, I am horrified by the possible negative impacts of such an elevated roadway! The thought of looking at our beautiful mountains and seeing (and hearing) traffic is just appalling. I would urge you, please, to insist on the original Jefferson/ Avenue 58 entrance. Thank you very much. Kindest regards, James Jones 1 Tania Flores From: JERRY KONZEN <jerrykonzen@cox.net> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 3:18 PM To: Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from jerrykonzen@cox.net. Learn why this is important 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 Trilogy at Ave 60 & Monroe and I do not support using the Avenue 62 elevated roadway as the primary construction and when complete operations exit. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension to reduce the impact to Trilogy Residents. Thanks for the consideration. Jerry Konzen 81629 Ulrich LaQuinta, Ca 92672 From: Doug Rein To: Planning WebMail; Cheri Flores; Tania Flores Subject: Planning Commission - Travertine access Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 10:36:01 AM I Some people who received this message don't often get email from dougrein73@gmail.com. Learn why this is im op rtant 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 wife and I are temporarily away from our house in La Quinta and are unable to attend tonight's meeting of the Planning Commission. I understand that an agenda item for tonight is the access to the Travertine project, which may soon be under construction. We strongly support having the primary entrance for the Travertine project be the Jefferson Street extension. In addition to the economies and reduced aggregate mileage resulting from using the Jefferson Street extension as the access to the project, that access/exit should facilitate business for merchants in downtown LaQuintta since Travertine residents wouldn't be required to backtrack from Avenue 62 and Madison. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Douglas Rein Tania Flores From: Lou Smaldino <Imsmaldino@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 11:46 AM To: Alena Callimanis; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from Imsmaldino@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 Ms. Flores, My wife and I live in the Trilogy La Quinta community. We support the Travertine Development BUT not the proposed primary access road and bridge to get there. Specifically, we do not support using the Monroe/Avenue 62 elevated roadway construction. This objection is based on its sight and sound resulting from its elevation and constant flow of vehicular traffic. The primary entrance and exit must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. It would be best to wait for this to occur and get the project done right from the start. Lou and Jackie Smaldino 81845 La Paz Ct La Quinta, CA 92253 707-570-5770 Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760-777-7067 www.laquintaca.gov -----Original Message ----- From: Mitch Soekland <msoekland@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 7:18 PM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine [You don't often get email from msoekland@sbcglobal.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] ** 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 DO NOT SUPPORT USING THE AVENUE 62 ELEVATED ROADWAY AS THE PRIMARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND EXIT MUST BE MOVED TO THE JEFFERSON STREET EXTENSION MITCH SOEKLAND 61743 TORO CANYON WAY LA QUINTA 92253 i From: Jan Talbott To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Proposed Entry and Egress from Travertine Development Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:36:47 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from talbott58@sbcglobal.net. Learn wh, this is important 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 want to voice my very strongly felt opposition to the proposed Monroe, (and elevated bridge over Dike No. 4), primary access to the proposed Travertine Development. I am opposed to the eyesore of this bridge monstrosity and loss of beautiful mountain vistas enjoyed by the residents of Trilogy La Quinta and neighboring populations. I am opposed to the much increased noise and air pollution across Avenue 60 during construction and after opening Travertine, particularly where a a much less disruptive and lower impact alternative exists as originally proposed; using the Jefferson extension as the principal access/egress route. I couldn't be more opposed to any use of a Madison Avenue extension except for access for emergency and maintenance vehicles only. This piece needs a long term guarantee to assure that this limited is maintained and that additional categories of access vehicles ever be legislated to circumvent this limited use. Thank you for your time and attention. Please do the right thing for our community. Jan Wm. Talbott Terry Ann Holst Year -around owners/residents of Trilogy La Quinta. Tania Flores From: Barb and Dave Vezzani <jeanandgino@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 10:22 AM To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from jeanandgino@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 the La Quinta Planning Committee: We are property owners in the lovely town of La Quinta. We do not support the building of an elevated roadway on Avenue 62 as the primary construction access and when completed, the operations entrance and exit for Travertine Development. The primary entrance and exit must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. Thankyou, Dave and Barb Vezzani From: William V. Whelan To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development/Trilogy community Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:24:29 AM You don't often get email from wwhelan@swsslaw.com. Learn why this is important 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. Ms. Flores, Ms. Flores, and Planning Staff: I own a home within the Trilogy development in La Quinta. I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed plan to construct an elevated roadway on Avenue 62 for the proposed Travertine project. Using such a plan, either as the primary construction access and exit — or as the main entrance and exit when the project is completed —would obviously have a significant negative effect on many Trilogy homeowners, as well as the Trilogy community overall. Trilogy homeowners on Monroe, Mesa Court, Rustic Canyon, Livingstone Drive, Caspian Drive, Laguna Court, Santa Rosa Court, and the western portion of Barrel Cactus would all be damaged by the proposed elevated roadway. There appears to be a much more viable as well as less costly option — which is to have Travertine's primary entrance and exit moved to the Jefferson Street extension. The integrity of the existing berm should be preserved. To be clear, I am not writing to oppose the Travertine Development as a whole. Rather, my/our objections are to the currently proposed elevated roadway and proposed points of ingress and egress. My hope is that your office will do what is best for the La Quinta community as a whole, not just Travertine's developer. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bill Whelan 81781 Rustic Canyon, La Quinta From: man Williams To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Objection to Travertine Elevated Roadway at Avenue 62 Date: Monday, June 24, 2024 10:28:35 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from brw5876@gmail.com. Learn wh, this is important 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. As a Trilogy homeowner I am opposed to the ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62 as the main access to the significant Travertine development. The bridge over the berm at this location, supporting major daily traffic, will block views of the mountains, create pollution, and erode property values. The primary entrance must be the Jefferson Street extension so that the serenity of our neighborhood is maintained. Respectfully, Bryan Bryan Williams 81920 Eagle Claw Drive La Quinta CA 92253 949 554-5876 brw5876(a)gmail.com Tania Flores From: Donna Williams <donna2399@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 2:31 PM To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Objection to proposed TRAVERTINE ingress -egress routes Some people who received this message don't often get email from donna2399@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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. As a Trilogy homeowner living near Monroe Avenue and Avenue 62, this letter is a statement of deep concern and vehement opposition to the proposed ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62 to support the proposed large scale Travertine project. An ELEVATED ROADWAY at this location, eventually supporting upwards of 6000 vehicles per day, will create significant visual, noise and air pollution, erode property values and completely destroy, forever, the serenity and peacefulness of our lovely senior community. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension and should never include an ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62. Thank you. Best regards, DONNA F. WILLIAMS 81920 Eagle Claw Drive La Quinta CA 92253 949-300-2399 1 From: Doug Rein To: Planning WebMail; Cheri Flores; Tania Flores Subject: Planning Commission - Travertine access Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 10:36:01 AM I Some people who received this message don't often get email from dougrein73@gmail.com. Learn why this is im op rtant 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 wife and I are temporarily away from our house in La Quinta and are unable to attend tonight's meeting of the Planning Commission. I understand that an agenda item for tonight is the access to the Travertine project, which may soon be under construction. We strongly support having the primary entrance for the Travertine project be the Jefferson Street extension. In addition to the economies and reduced aggregate mileage resulting from using the Jefferson Street extension as the access to the project, that access/exit should facilitate business for merchants in downtown LaQuintta since Travertine residents wouldn't be required to backtrack from Avenue 62 and Madison. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Douglas Rein Tania Flores From: Lou Smaldino <Imsmaldino@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 11:46 AM To: Alena Callimanis; Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from Imsmaldino@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 Ms. Flores, My wife and I live in the Trilogy La Quinta community. We support the Travertine Development BUT not the proposed primary access road and bridge to get there. Specifically, we do not support using the Monroe/Avenue 62 elevated roadway construction. This objection is based on its sight and sound resulting from its elevation and constant flow of vehicular traffic. The primary entrance and exit must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. It would be best to wait for this to occur and get the project done right from the start. Lou and Jackie Smaldino 81845 La Paz Ct La Quinta, CA 92253 707-570-5770 Tania Flores From: Cheri Flores Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:28 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: FW: Travertine Cheri L. Flores I Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760-777-7067 www.laquintaca.gov -----Original Message ----- From: Mitch Soekland <msoekland@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 7:18 PM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Travertine [You don't often get email from msoekland@sbcglobal.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] ** 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 DO NOT SUPPORT USING THE AVENUE 62 ELEVATED ROADWAY AS THE PRIMARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND EXIT MUST BE MOVED TO THE JEFFERSON STREET EXTENSION MITCH SOEKLAND 61743 TORO CANYON WAY LA QUINTA 92253 i From: Jan Talbott To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Proposed Entry and Egress from Travertine Development Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:36:47 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from talbott58@sbcglobal.net. Learn wh, this is important 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 want to voice my very strongly felt opposition to the proposed Monroe, (and elevated bridge over Dike No. 4), primary access to the proposed Travertine Development. I am opposed to the eyesore of this bridge monstrosity and loss of beautiful mountain vistas enjoyed by the residents of Trilogy La Quinta and neighboring populations. I am opposed to the much increased noise and air pollution across Avenue 60 during construction and after opening Travertine, particularly where a a much less disruptive and lower impact alternative exists as originally proposed; using the Jefferson extension as the principal access/egress route. I couldn't be more opposed to any use of a Madison Avenue extension except for access for emergency and maintenance vehicles only. This piece needs a long term guarantee to assure that this limited is maintained and that additional categories of access vehicles ever be legislated to circumvent this limited use. Thank you for your time and attention. Please do the right thing for our community. Jan Wm. Talbott Terry Ann Holst Year -around owners/residents of Trilogy La Quinta. Tania Flores From: Barb and Dave Vezzani <jeanandgino@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 10:22 AM To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development Some people who received this message don't often get email from jeanandgino@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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 the La Quinta Planning Committee: We are property owners in the lovely town of La Quinta. We do not support the building of an elevated roadway on Avenue 62 as the primary construction access and when completed, the operations entrance and exit for Travertine Development. The primary entrance and exit must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension. Thankyou, Dave and Barb Vezzani From: William V. Whelan To: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Planning WebMail Subject: Travertine Development/Trilogy community Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:24:29 AM You don't often get email from wwhelan@swsslaw.com. Learn why this is important 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. Ms. Flores, Ms. Flores, and Planning Staff: I own a home within the Trilogy development in La Quinta. I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed plan to construct an elevated roadway on Avenue 62 for the proposed Travertine project. Using such a plan, either as the primary construction access and exit — or as the main entrance and exit when the project is completed —would obviously have a significant negative effect on many Trilogy homeowners, as well as the Trilogy community overall. Trilogy homeowners on Monroe, Mesa Court, Rustic Canyon, Livingstone Drive, Caspian Drive, Laguna Court, Santa Rosa Court, and the western portion of Barrel Cactus would all be damaged by the proposed elevated roadway. There appears to be a much more viable as well as less costly option — which is to have Travertine's primary entrance and exit moved to the Jefferson Street extension. The integrity of the existing berm should be preserved. To be clear, I am not writing to oppose the Travertine Development as a whole. Rather, my/our objections are to the currently proposed elevated roadway and proposed points of ingress and egress. My hope is that your office will do what is best for the La Quinta community as a whole, not just Travertine's developer. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bill Whelan 81781 Rustic Canyon, La Quinta From: man Williams To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Objection to Travertine Elevated Roadway at Avenue 62 Date: Monday, June 24, 2024 10:28:35 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from brw5876@gmail.com. Learn wh, this is important 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. As a Trilogy homeowner I am opposed to the ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62 as the main access to the significant Travertine development. The bridge over the berm at this location, supporting major daily traffic, will block views of the mountains, create pollution, and erode property values. The primary entrance must be the Jefferson Street extension so that the serenity of our neighborhood is maintained. Respectfully, Bryan Bryan Williams 81920 Eagle Claw Drive La Quinta CA 92253 949 554-5876 brw5876(a)gmail.com Tania Flores From: Donna Williams <donna2399@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 2:31 PM To: Cheri Flores; Planning WebMail; Tania Flores Subject: Objection to proposed TRAVERTINE ingress -egress routes Some people who received this message don't often get email from donna2399@gmail.com. Learn why this is important 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. As a Trilogy homeowner living near Monroe Avenue and Avenue 62, this letter is a statement of deep concern and vehement opposition to the proposed ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62 to support the proposed large scale Travertine project. An ELEVATED ROADWAY at this location, eventually supporting upwards of 6000 vehicles per day, will create significant visual, noise and air pollution, erode property values and completely destroy, forever, the serenity and peacefulness of our lovely senior community. The primary entrance must be moved to the Jefferson Street extension and should never include an ELEVATED ROADWAY at Avenue 62. Thank you. Best regards, DONNA F. WILLIAMS 81920 Eagle Claw Drive La Quinta CA 92253 949-300-2399 1 P: (626) 314-3821 0 139 South Hudson Avenue F: (626) 389-5414 Mitchell M. Tsai Suite 200 E: info@mitchtsailaw.com Law Firm Pasadena, California 91101 VIA E-MAIL June 25, 2024 Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Em: clflores@la@ntaca.gov Em: Vlanningglacluintaca.gov RE: Public Hearing Agenda Item No. 1- Travertine Specific Plan Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report [SCH 2O18011023] Dear Chair Nieto, Honorable Commissioners and Ms. Flores, On behalf of the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters ("Western States Carpenters" or "WSRCC"), our firm is submitting these comments to the City of La Quinta ("City") in connection June 25, 2024 Planning Commission continued hearing regarding the Travertine Specific Plan Project ("Project") and the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") associated therewith. The Project includes development of a mix of uses including up to 1,200 dwelling units of varying residential product types and two community parks (east and west) on 378.8 acres; a 38.3-acre resort/spa facility with a 45,000-square-foot boutique hotel with a 175-seat restaurant, 97,500 square feet of resort villas, and 8,700 square feet of spa and wellness center, as well as yoga and tennis courts; a 46.2-acre resort/golf facility with a 5,500-square-foot golf academy, a 1,000-square-foot clubhouse, and 10,000- square- foot banquet restaurant (500-seat capacity). The Western States Carpenters is a labor union representing over 90,000 union carpenters in 12 states, including California, and has a strong interest in well -ordered land use planning and in addressing the environmental impacts of development projects. Individual members of the Western States Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project's environmental impacts. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 2of19 The Western States Carpenters expressly reserves the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearing and proceeding related to this Project. Gov. Code, § 65009, subd. (b); Pub. Res. Code, 21177, subd. (a); see Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 1184, 1199-1203; see also Galante Vineyards V. Monterey rater Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1121. The Western States Carpenters incorporates by reference all comments raising issues regarding the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. See Citizens for Clean Energy v City of Wloodland (2014) 225 Cal.AppAth 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the project's environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties). I. THE CITY SHOULD REQUIRE THE USE OF A LOCAL WORKFORCE TO BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT The City should require the Project to be built using a local workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor -Management Apprenticeship Program approved by the State of California, 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 a state -approved apprenticeship training program. Community benefits such as local hire 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 provide 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. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 3of19 Workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce Development Board and the University of California, Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded: [L]abor 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.' Furthermore, workforce policies have significant environmental benefits given that they improve an area's jobs -housing balance, decreasing the amount and length of job commutes and the associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In fact, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the "[u]se of a local state -certified apprenticeship program" can result in air pollutant reductions.2 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.' Moreover, local hire mandates and skill -training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). As planning experts Robert Cervero and 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 htWs://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ w�-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 athttp://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source /Agendas /Governing-Board/2021 /2021-May7-027.12df?sfvrsn= 10. s California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs -Housing Balance at p. 6, available athttl2s://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs- housing_pdf City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 4of19 Michael Duncan have noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions given that the skill requirements of available local jobs must match those held by local residents.4 Some municipalities have even tied local hire and other workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. Cervero and Duncan note that: 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. Recently, the State of California verified its commitment towards workforce development through the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, otherwise known as Assembly Bill No. 2011 ("AB2011"). AB2011 amended the Planning and Zoning Law to allow ministerial, by -right approval for projects being built alongside commercial corridors that meet affordability and labor requirements. The City should consider utilizing local workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and to mitigate greenhouse gas, improve air quality, and reduce transportation impacts. II. THE CITY SHOULD IMPOSE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT'S CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO PREVENT COMMUNITY SPREAD OF COVID-19 AND OTHER INFECTIOUS DISEASES 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 a 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 athttp://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT- 825.12df. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 5of19 construction sites have been identified as sources of community spread of COVID- 19.5 The Western States Carpenters recommend that the City adopt additional requirements to mitigate public health risks from the Project's construction activities. The Western States Carpenters requests that the City 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 the Western States Carpenters' experience with safe construction site work practices, the Western States Carpenters recommends that the City 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. • 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. 'Santa Clara County Public Health Qune 12, 2020) COVID-19 CASES AT CONSTRUCTION SITES HIGHLIGHT NEED FOR CONTINUED VIGILANCE IN SECTORS THAT HAVE REOPENED, availableathttps://www.sccgov.org/sites/ covidl 9 /Pages /press-release-06-12-2020-cases-at-construction-sites.aspx. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 6of19 • 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 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. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 7of19 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. 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. The Western States Carpenters has also developed a rigorous Infection Control Risk Assessment ("ICRA") training program to ensure it delivers a workforce that understands how to identify and control infection risks by implementing protocols to protect themselves and all others during renovation and construction projects in healthcare environments.' ICRA protocols are intended to contain pathogens, control airflow, and protect patients during the construction, maintenance and renovation of healthcare facilities. e See also The Center for Construction Research and Training, North America's Building Trades Unions (April 27 2020) NABTU and CPWR COV1C-19 Standards for U.S Constructions Sites, available athtWs://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 C0V1D-19 Pandemic, available at https://dl2w.lacounty.g,ov/building-and-safety/docs/pw guidelines-construction-sites.pdf. For details concerning the Western States Carpenters' 1CRA training program, see hLtl2s://icrahealthcare.com/. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 8of19 ICRA protocols prevent cross contamination, minimizing the risk of secondary infections in patients at hospital facilities. The City should require the Project to be built using a workforce trained in ICRA protocols. III. THE CITY MUST REVISE THE DEIR FOR THE PROJECT CEQA is a California statute designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 California Code of Regulations ("CEQA Guidelines") § 15002(a)(1).8 At its core, "[i]ts purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made." Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. To achieve this purpose, CEQA mandates preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for projects so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing the project can be understood and weighed. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80. The EIR requirement "is the heart of CEQA." CEQA Guidelines, § 15003(a). 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 P. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 70, 80 (quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Kesponsible Growth, Inc. P. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal. 4th 412, 449-450). The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 15000 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 P. Department of Fisb & Vildlife (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 204, 217. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 9of19 Section 15088.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines provides that an EIR must be recirculated whenever there is disclosure of significant new information. Significant new information includes: (1) disclosure of a new significant environmental impact resulting from the project or from a new proposed mitigation measure; (2) disclosure of a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance; and (3) disclosure of a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed which would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project which the project proponents decline to adopt. Id. Additionally, an EIR must be recirculated when it is so fundamentally inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment is precluded. Id. [citing Mountain Lion Coalition P. Fish & Game Com. (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1043]. Here, as discussed below, the DEIR fails to substantiate all of its conclusions to allow meaningful public review and comment, provide adequate mitigation measures, and fully assess all pertinent environmental factors. Accordingly, this comment letter discloses significant new information, necessitating revision and recirculation of the DEIR. A. The DEIR's Alternatives Are Legally Inadequate An EIR must discuss a reasonable range of alternatives to the project, which "shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects." CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(a)&(c). "[T]he discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives.... which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project...." CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(b). Further, an EIR is legally inadequate if it contains an overly narrow range of alternatives. Watsonville Pilots Assn P. City of Vatsonville (2010) 183 Cal.AppAth 1059, 1087, 20190 [not considering a reduced development alternative was error]. Here, the DEIR considered a (1) no project alternative; (2) an originally approved specific plan alternative; and (3) a phase 1 only alternative. DEIR at 7-42. However, the DEIR notes that both build alternatives it considered would continue to result in similar or greater aesthetic, geology & soils, hazards & hazardous material, hydrology & water quality, land use planning, population & housing, public services, recreation, City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 10 of 19 and utility impacts. Id. Accordingly, the DEIR fails to consider a reasonable range of alternatives which could eliminate or reduce the Project's significant impacts, as required. B. The DEIR's Mitigation Measures Are Insufficient 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" 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 P. City of Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1039. CEQA mitigation measures proposed and adopted are required to describe what actions 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, such exception is narrowly proscribed to situations where it is impractical or infeasible to include those details during the project's environmental review. 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). Here, the DEIR's mitigation measures are improperly deferred or fail to adequately mitigate the Project's impacts as follows: City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 11 of 19 Biological Resources Although the DEIR imposes 37 mitigation measures to mitigate the Project's biological resource impacts, several of the measures are insufficient. For example, mitigation measures BIO-26 and BIO-27 require pre -construction surveys solely for Le Conte thrashers and Burrowing Owls, despite the DEIR finding that the Project site may also contain black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), loggerhead shrike (Lanus ludovicianus), long-eared owl (Asio otus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), and prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus). Compare DEIR at 1-20 — 1-21 with 4.4-10. Thus, BIO-27 should be revised to require pre -construction nesting bird surveys for all nesting birds rather than just for Le Conte thrashers. Additionally, mitigation measures BIO-27 and BIO-28 define the nesting season as February 1- August 31. Such a timeframe is inconsistent with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's ("CDFW") finding that certain species "commence nesting activities in January... and nest later than August 31"' The nesting period on the mitigation measures should be revised to account for these findings. The measures also fail to specify that surveys should be consistent with CDFW protocols. Such specification is necessary to ensure that the measure, and surveys which it requires, are adequate. Mitigation measures BIO-17 and BIO-30 require light shielding to avoid lighting impacts but fail to specify how such shielding shall be achieved or when such shielding will be implemented. Absent such preparation and specifications, the measures are improperly deferred and cannot support the DEIR's less than significant biological resource impact finding. Moreover, the Project would construct approximately 1,000 feet of the Jefferson Street roadway through and upon the Santa Rosa & San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area, which has been designated as "Critical Habitat" by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No analysis is provided in the DEIR as to if and how the Project intends to mitigate the associated impacts to the Conservation Area. Further still, as to the Project's cumulative impacts on biological resources, in conjunction with the 9 See CDFW November 18, 2021 letter to City of Adelanto at 3, available at https: / /files.cedanet.ol2r.ca.gov/273819- 1/attachment/zo76RgD7dUdj 5BLJTEhEMdf74g6f100RrKiWBQSquhFFe5lOX53rLsbLSG MPRXgXM4AaYn Sj TfZB61JpY0 City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 12 of 19 development of the neighboring Coral Canyon project and the Resort at Coral Mountain project, the Project will completely cut off Coral Mountain (an undeveloped mountain area north of the Project site within the City limits that has been documented as supporting Peninsular Bighorn Sheep) from the aforementioned federal Conservation Area. The DEIR wholly ignores this impact and the associated habitat fragmentation that will result from the collective development of these three adjacent major development projects. To that end, additional study of the Project's cumulative impacts on biological resources is absolutely warranted. ii. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The DEIR finds that the Project greenhouse gas ("GHG") impacts will be significant and unavoidable. DEIR at 1-33. Thus, the DEIR imposes several measures in attempt to mitigate such impacts, GHG-1 — GHG-11. GHG-2 provides that "[a]ll residences shall incorporate roof -top solar panels, in -home batteries and EV charger stations to facilitate use of EVs, golf carts and other low - speed electric vehicles (LSEVs)." DEIR at 1-33. However, the measure fails to specify any quantities or minimum coverage for the solar panels, batteries, and charger stations. Similarly, GHG-5 requires that "[a]ll non-residential components of the development where vehicle parking is provides shall also provide EV chargers" without in fact specifying any percentage of required chargers. DEIR at 1-34. The DEIR must be revised to provide such specification in the mitigation measures. iii. Ha.Zards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation measure HAZ-1 requires that "Prior to grading, Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be required. The Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation shall be conducted by an Environmental Professional as defined in Section 312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312." DEIR at 1-35. Thus, it appears as though no Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation has been conducted yet, absent any explanation as to why it is not feasible to do so at this time. Likewise, HAZ-8 requires that "[t]he Project shall consult an asbestos inspection consultant for a comprehensive asbestos survey prior to demolition of the project site", without indicating why such consultation is not feasible at this time. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 13 of 19 Absent such preparation or specification, the DEIR's mitigation measures are improperly deferred. iv. Noise Mitigation measure NOI-5 provides that "[p]rior to water well drilling, the construction contractor shall provide a temporary 24-foot-high noise barrier capable of reducing noise during well construction activities to 80 dBA Leq or less." DEIR at 1-39. However, such a measure fails to note whether the barrier will reduce noise levels at both the ground level as well as elevated sources. Additionally, the measure does not indicate that barriers will be implemented to also reduce noise levels at elevated sources above ground as the various phases of building construction progress. Moreover, there is no indication that any such temporary noise barrier(s) will also be moveable to ensure it properly reduces the sound of the construction noise at its source. As noted by the court in AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, LASC Case Number: 19STCP05445 (April 5, 2021): "The City's response actually concedes the flaw in the efficacy of MM 1- 2 as it is written. Effective mitigation to sensitive receptors requires the noise barrier systems to be moved. The City argues MM 1-2 is effective because `the noise barriers are moveable, meaning that they move in concert with any piece of construction equipment to ensure the equipment does not operate with an unobstructed line of sight to a receptor.' (Opposition Brief 35:15-17.) The City recognizes the barriers must be moveable `to shield construction activities, no matter where they occur onsite.' (Opposition Brief 35:18-19.) Despite the City's recognition the noise barriers must be moved throughout the Project during construction to effectively mitigate construction -related noise, MM 1-2 does not require such movement. It is not about wordsmithing-it is about enforceability and efficacy. The City's attempts to distinguish between `Project boundaries' and `property boundaries' is unpersuasive.24 Such a distinction -if there is one -does not resolve the ambiguity. Nothing in MM 1-2 requires any noise barriers to be moved.*25 Accordingly, the court finds substantial evidence does not City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 14 of 19 support the City's conclusion MM 1-2 is an effective mitigation measure." (Exhibit D, p. 20 [Ruling] .) Absent such specifications, the mitigation measure is legally inadequate and cannot support a finding that the Project's noise impacts may be reduced to the level identified. C. The DEIR Fails to Supbort its Findings on Land Use with Substantial Evidence Each California city and county must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan governing development. Napa Citi.Zens for Honest Gov. P. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.AppAth 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 P. County of Napa (1995) 9 CalAth 763, 773; Lesber Communications, Inc. P. City of Wlalnut 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." Debottari P. Norco City Council (1985) 171 Ca1.App.3d 1204, 1213. It is well established that development projects may not be approved if they interfere with, or frustrate, the general plan's policies and objectives. See Napa Citizens, 91 Cal.AppAth at 378-79; see also Lesher, 52 Ca1.3d at 544. Here, the DEIR fails to analyze the consistency of the Project's requested entitlements with the General Plan and Specific Plan. Specifically, amongst other entitlements, the Project requires a general plan amendment, zone change, specific plan amendment, tentative parcel map, and development plan approval. DEIR at 1-4. However, rather than specifically analyzing the consistency of such departures from the plans, the DEIR merely presumes that such entitlements are consistent because they "do not represent a substantial change to the character of the area envisioned in the General Plan. DEIR at p. 4.11-27. Thus, the DEIR's less than significant finding is unsupported and, for this reason too, the DEIR must be revised and recirculated to conduct adequate consistency analysis for each individual entitlement requested. D. The DEIR's Hydrology and Water Quality Findings and Analysis Are Insufficient CEQA requires that an EIR identify and discuss the significant effects of a Project, how those significant effects can be mitigated or avoided. CEQA Guidelines § City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 15 of 19 15126.2; PRC §§ 21100(b)(1), 21002.1(a). If a project has a significant effect on the environment, an 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." CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A—B). Such findings must be supported by substantial evidence. CEQA Guidelines § 15091(b). The DEIR at hand fails to comply with these requirements. Specifically, the DEIR provides that "[t]he proposed clearing, grading, and construction activities" have the potential to result in surface water quality impacts." DEIR at p. 4.10-20. Such impacts are of particular concern given that the Project site is within 700 feet of critical habitat for the federally endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep. Id. at p. 4.4-12. Nevertheless, rather than in fact assessing the severity and probability of potential construction related water quality impacts, the DEIR merely concludes that such impacts will be less than significant because the Project will be required to comply with Construction General Permit requirements and best management practices. Id. at p. 4.10-20. Such a blanket conclusion runs afoul to CEQA because it is well established that determinations 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. See Californians for Alternatives to Toxics P. Department of Food &Agric. (2005) 136 Cal. App. 4th 1; Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (2008) 43 Cal. App. 4th 936, 956. The DEIR cannot rely upon regulatory compliance in making its less than significant impact determination without assessing and providing Project specific information and analysis as to its anticipated water quality impacts. E. The DEIR Fails to Adeduatel�: Analyze the Project's Cumulative Impacts. An EIR must discuss a cumulative impact if the project's incremental effect combined with the effects of other projects is "cumulatively considerable." 14 C.C.R. §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 C.C.R. 515065(a)(3); Banning Ranch Conservancy v City of Newport Beach (2012) 211 CA4th 1209, 1228. See also 14 C.C.R. 515355(b). City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 16 of 19 The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR implement the provisions of Pub. Res. Code §21083(b)(2), which specifies that the Guidelines must include criteria requiring public agencies to find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if its possible effects "are individually limited but cumulatively considerable." 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. Wlhitman v Board of Supervisors (1979) 88 Ca1.App.3d 397, 408 (citing Natural Resources Defense Council v Callaway (2d Cir 1975) 524 F2d 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/ ilildlife Rescue Or. v County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.AppAth 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 1laterAgeney (2003) 108 CA4th 859. An EIR must discuss cumulative impacts when they are significant, and the project's incremental contribution is "cumulatively considerable." 14 C.C.R. §15130(a). A project's incremental contribution is cumulatively considerable if the incremental effects of the project are significant "when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects." 14 C.C.R. §15065(a)(3). Here, the DEIR for the Project already notes that the Project is anticipated to have significant and unavoidable impacts in the areas of Air Quality and GHG Emissions, and that, absent implementation of extensive mitigation measures, the Project would otherwise be anticipated have significant impacts in the areas of Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, and Public Services. Despite the wide scope of significant impacts presented by the Project individually, the DEIR contains no reference or consideration whatsoever of two major development projects planned to be constructed adjacent to the Project site. The first is the Resort at Coral Mountain project, for which the City just certified an EIR on March 5, 2024, and which is due to be constructed less than a half mile from the Project's northeast edge. The Coral Mountain Resort project, as approved, will include development of 750 low -density residential units, a golf course, and 60,000 City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 17 of 19 square feet of retail commercial construction, spanning 387 acres immediately northeast of Coral Mountain. The second adjacent project is the Coral Canyons project, in connection with which the City certified the Green Specific Plan on June 6, 1995, and later approved Tentative Tract Maps pursuant to adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Coral Canyons, which is due to be constructed less than a half mile from the northwest edge of the Project, would consist of development of 219 single family lots on 317.61 acres directly west of Coral Mountain. The Jefferson Street roadway, on which the current Project is dependent for vehicular access and traffic flow, would necessarily run directly through the Coral Canyons project to the north. Upon completion of construction of the Project, and in conjunction with these assorted neighboring projects, the entirety of Coral Mountain will be surrounded on all sides by nearly 1,000 acres of new development, where there was otherwise previously no adjacent development to be found. It defies belief, and CEQA, that the DEIR makes absolutely no mention (let alone discussion and analysis) of these two adjacent major development projects, both of which are further along in their respective planning processes, when considering the cumulative impacts that the Project will have within the City. Accordingly, the DEIR must be revised and recirculated to consider and fully analyze the potential cumulative impacts presented by the Project in conjunction with the known development projects in its immediate vicinity. Absent doing so, the DEIR will remain legally deficient, and any approval/certification of it in its current form will violate CEQA. IV. THE CITY HAS NOT RESPONDED TO PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THE DEIR AND HAS NOT CIRCULATED A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. The two Staff Reports prepared for the City's Planning Commission in connection with the Project note that "public comments were received from various public agencies and residents regarding air quality, noise, aesthetics, geology, land use, housing, and traffic impacts," and "[a] fter the May 28 meeting, public comments were received..." (See Planning Commission Agenda Packet for May 28, 2024 Hearing at p. 102; see also Planning Commission Agenda Packet for June 25, 2024 Hearing at p. 7.) Moreover, there is no indication that a Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") has been prepared for the Project. Meanwhile, the resolutions put before the Planning Commission for approval at the June 25, 2024 hearing include a recommendation by City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 18 of 19 the Planning Commission that the EIR for the Project be certified, and the DEIR suggests that the certification of the FEIR will be considered only by the City Council, rather than both the Planning Commission and then the City Council. (See DEIR at p. 81.) This apparent procedural sidestep sits in stark contrast to the procedure followed by the City in connection with its recent certification of the EIR in the Coral Mountain Resort project (for which the City's Planning Commission considered the FEIR and adopted a resolution recommending its certification to the City Council), as well as undermines California's environmental review process and violates the CEQA. The CEQA Guidelines require the Lead Agency on a project to prepare a FEIR prior to approving a project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15089(a) — "The Lead Agency shall prepare a final EIR before approving the project.") The required contents of a FEIR are prescribed by CEQA Guidelines § 15132, which are as follows: (a) The draft EIR or a revision of the draft. (b) Comments and recommendations received on the draft EIR either verbatim or in summary. (c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the draft EIR. (d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. (e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency. CEQA Guidelines § 15132. Here, as it stands, and based on the public comments that the Staff Report admits were received by the City regarding significant environmental points on the Project, the City will have violated CEQA if it fails to prepare a FEIR prior to proceeding with certification. To date, the City has not circulated any public comments to the DEIR or its required responses thereto. Absent preparation and circulation of a FEIR for the Project, no certification of the EIR can permissibly occur. The City must remedy this procedural deficiency, and the Planning Commission should not proceed with recommending any resolutions pertaining to the Project until this CEQA violation is cured. City of La Quinta — Travertine Specific Plan Project June 25, 2024 Page 19 of 19 V. CONCLUSION In sum, WSRCC requests that the City require a local workforce, that the City impose training requirements for the Project's construction activities to prevent community spread of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases, and that the City revise and recirculate the DEIR for the Project to address the aforementioned concerns. If the City has any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, A� Je y Herwitt Attorneys for Western States 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); and AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, LASC Case Number: 19STCP05445 (April 5, 2021 Ruling) (Exhibit D). EXHIBIT A Technical Co9sulkation, Data Analysis and S Litigalion Supporil for the Environment 2656 291h 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 ("CaIEEMod") 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."' CaIEEMod 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 CaIEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on -road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.' 1 "California Emissions Estimator Model." CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/home. Z "California Emissions Estimator Model." CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/home. 3 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 1 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, CaIEEMod 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, CaIEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip length (see excerpt below): "VMTd = F(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length 1) n Where: n = Number of land uses being modeled."' Furthermore, to calculate the on -road emissions associated with worker trips, CaIEEMod utilizes the following equation (see excerpt below): "EmisslonSpollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant Where: Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant VMT = vehicle miles traveled EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions."' 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.' In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CaIEEMod 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.' 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.agmd.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.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, P. 23. ' "Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.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.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. $ CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9. 2 number of pieces of equipment for all phases by 1.25, with the exception of worker trips required for the building construction and architectural coating phases.9 Furthermore, the worker trip vehicle class is a 50/25/25 percent mix of light duty autos, light duty truck class 1 and light duty truck class 2, respectively."10 Finally, the default worker trip length is consistent with the length of the operational home -to -work vehicle trips.11 The operational home -to -work vehicle trip lengths are: "[B]ased on the location and urbanization selected on the project characteristic screen. These values were supplied by the air districts or use a default average for the state. Each district (or county) also assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings" (emphasis added). 12 Thus, the default worker trip length is based on the location and urbanization level selected by the User when modeling emissions. The below table shows the CaIEEMod default rural and urban worker trip lengths by air basin (see excerpt below and Attachment A).13 Worker Trip Length by Air Basin 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 Minimum 10.80 10.80 Maximum 19.80 14.70 Range 9.00 3.90 9 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01 user-39-s-guide2016-3-2 15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 10 "Appendix A Calculation Details for CaIEEMod." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 11 "Appendix A Calculation Details for CaIEEMod." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14. 12 "Appendix A Calculation Details for CaIEEMod." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02 appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 21. 13 "Appendix D Default Data Tables." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05 appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-84 - D-86. 3 As demonstrated above, default rural worker trip lengths for air basins in California vary from 10.8- to 19.8- miles, with an average of 16.47 miles. Furthermore, default urban worker trip lengths vary from 10.8- to 14.7- miles, with an average of 11.17 miles. Thus, while default worker trip lengths vary by location, default urban worker trip lengths tend to be shorter in length. Based on these trends evident in the CalEEMod default worker trip lengths, we can reasonably assume that the efficacy of a local hire requirement is especially dependent upon the urbanization of the project site, as well as the project location. Practical Application of a Local Hire Requirement and Associated Impact To provide an example of the potential impact of a local hire provision on construction -related GHG emissions, we estimated the significance of a local hire provision for the Village South Specific Plan ("Project") located in the City of Claremont ("City"). The Project proposed to construct 1,000 residential units, 100,000-SF of retail space, 45,000-SF of office space, as well as a 50-room hotel, on the 24-acre site. The Project location is classified as Urban and lies within the Los Angeles -South Coast County. As a result, the Project has a default worker trip length of 14.7 miles.14 In an effort to evaluate the potential for a local hire provision to reduce the Project's construction -related GHG emissions, we prepared an updated model, reducing all worker trip lengths to 10 miles (see Attachment B). Our analysis estimates that if a local hire provision with a 10-mile radius were to be implemented, the GHG emissions associated with Project construction would decrease by approximately 17% (see table below and Attachment C). Local Hire Provision Net Change Without Local Hire Provision Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 3,623 120.77 With Local Hire Provision Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) Decrease in Construction -related GHG Emissions 3,024 100.80 17% As demonstrated above, by implementing a local hire provision requiring 10 mile worker trip lengths, the Project could reduce potential GHG emissions associated with construction worker trips. More broadly, any 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. This serves as an example of the potential impacts of local hire requirements on estimated project -level GHG emissions, though it does not indicate that local hire requirements would result in reduced construction -related GHG emission for all projects. As previously described, the significance of a local hire requirement depends on the worker trip length enforced and the default worker trip length for the project's urbanization level and location. 14 "Appendix D Default Data Tables." CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05 appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-85. 4 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. 5 Attachment A Rural H-W Urban H-W Location Type Location Name (miles) (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 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 Worker Air Basin Great Basin Valleys Lake County Lake Tahoe Mojave Desert Mountain Counties North Central Coast North Coast Northeast Plateau Sacramento Valley Salton Sea San Diego San Francisco Bay Area San Joaquin Valley South Central Coast South Coast Average Mininum Maximum Range igth by Air Basin Rural (miles) 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 17.1 16.8 16.8 16.8 14.6 16.8 10.8 16.8 16.8 19.8 16.47 10.80 19.80 9.00 Urban (miles) 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 12.3 10.8 10.8 10.8 11 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 14.7 11.17 10.80 14.70 3.90 Attachment B CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ---------------------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- - h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 + High = — — ;-------------------- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 -----------------------------_------------------------------ _------------------------------ Hotel 50.00 + = — -- —;------------- ------- Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 -----------y----------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + = --- ---—;-------------------- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + = --- --------- —;------------- Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 -----------------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------=-----------------------i------------------+--------------- Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 + Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------ _------------------------------ _----------------------------- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM 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. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblFireplaces FireplaceWood Mass IT 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ -------------------------- NumberWood r 1.25 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------r----------------------------- ------------------------- NumberWood 48.75 0.00 ---------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------ ------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 158.37 79.82 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 94.36 63.99 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 49.97 10.74 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 6.07 6.16 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- SU_TR 5.86 4.18 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 1.05 0.69 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- SU_TR 131.84 78.27 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- SU_TR �-----------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Year tons/yr MT/yr 2021 •i 0.1713 i 1.8242 � 1.1662 i 2.4000e- 0.4169 0.0817 i 0.4986 0.1795 i 0.0754 0.2549 0.0000 i 213.1969 213.1969 i 0.0601 0.0000 214.6993 003 ------------- 2022 •i 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 i 1,721.682 1,721.682 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918 i � i � � i � i � � i � '� i i i i i i i i • 1 6 i 6 i i i 7 2023 •i 0.6148 i 3.3649 � 5.6747 i 0.0178 � 1.1963 � 0.0996 i 1.2959 � 0.3203 i 0.0935 0.4138 � 0.0000 i 1,627.529 1,627.529 i 0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492 '� i i i i i i i i • 5 i 5 i i 5 2024 •1 4.1619 i 0.1335 0.2810 i 5.9000e- 0.0325 6.4700e- i 0.0390 8.6300e- i 6.0400e- 0.0147 0.0000 i 52.9078 52.9078 i 8.0200e- 0.0000 1 53.1082 004 003 003 003 : 003 i 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 1,721.682 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918 6 6 7 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Year tons/yr MT/yr 2021 •i 0.1713 i 1.8242 � 1.1662 i 2.4000e- 0.4169 0.0817 i 0.4986 0.1795 i 0.0754 0.2549 0.0000 i 213.1967 � 213.1967 i 0.0601 0.0000 214.6991 003 2022 •i 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 i 1,721.682 1,721.682 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918 i � i � � i � i � � i 3 i 3 i i i 3 2023 •i 0.6148 i 3.3648 5.6747 i 0.0178 1.1963 0.0996 i 1.2959 0.3203 i 0.0935 0.4138 0.0000 i 1,627.529 1,627.529 i 0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492 2024 •1 4.1619 i 0.1335 0.2810 i 5.9000e- 0.0325 6.4700e- i 0.0390 8.6300e- i 6.0400e- 0.0147 0.0000 i 52.9077 52.9077 i 8.0200e- 0.0000 53.1082 004 003 003 003 : 003 i 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 1,721.682 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918 3 3 3 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 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 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 i 10.3804 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 i i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 i 220.9670 i 0.0201 i 3.7400e- 222.5835 Energy •i 0.1398 i 1.2312 i 0.7770 7.6200e- i i 0.0966 i 0.0966 i i 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1 3,896.073 i 3,896.073 i 0.1303 i 0.0468 3,913.283 003 i i i i i 2 i 2 i i 3 ;� i i i i Mobile •1 1.5857 i 7.9962 i 19.1834 i 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 i 7.8559 i 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 1 7,620.498 7,620.498 i 0.3407 0.0000 1 7,629.016 '1 i i i i i i i i 1 6 i 6 i i 1 2 Waste •1 i i i � � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 i 0.0000 207.8079 i 12.2811 0.0000 1 514.8354 ------------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- -------------- ----------------------*------r------ ---------------j-------*------- Water •1 i i i � � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 � 29.1632 i 556.6420 � 585.8052 i 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 12,531.15 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47 j j j j 07 19 j 51 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 10.3804 i 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 � i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 � 220.9670 i 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 i Energy •i 0.1398 i 1.2312 0.7770 i 7.6200e- 0.0966 i 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 i 3,896.073 3,896.073 i 0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283 003 i i i i i 2 i 2 i i i 3 Mobile •i 1.5857 i 7.9962 19.1834 i 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 i 7.8559 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 i 7,620.498 7,620.498 i 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016 6 i 6 i i i 2 Waste •1 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 i 0.0000 207.8079 i 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 Water •1 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 • 29.1632 i 556.6420 585.8052 i 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 12,531.15 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47 07 19 51 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM 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 19/1/2021 110/12/2021 5: 30: + i 2 :Site Preparation +Site Preparation 110/13/2021 :11/9/2021 5: 20: + i 3 •Grading +Grading 111/10/2021 :1/11/2022 5: 45: + i 4 -Building Construction +Building Construction 11/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: + i 5 -Paving +Paving 112/13/2023 :1/30/2024 5: 35: + i 6 -Architectural Coating -Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5. 35, Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00" 0.001 458.00; 14.70: 6.90; 20.00:LD_Mix 1HDT_Mix (HHDT ------------- Site Preparation 7; -----_--, 18.00: --------i 0.001 0.00: --------- 14.70: ------------------------ 6.90; 20.00;LD_Mix ----------r--------_ ;HDT_Mix ;HHDT �- --------------- ° Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 14.70: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 14.70: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 14.70: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f ; Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 14.70, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i , , , , 0.0496 , 0.0000 , 0.0496 , 7.5100e- , 0.0000 ; 7.5100e- 0.0000 i 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0475 , 0.4716 , 0.3235 , 5.8000e- , , 0.0233 , 0.0233 , , 0.0216 ; 0.0216 0.0000 i 51.0012 , 51.0012 , 0.0144 , 0.0000 i 51.3601 004 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e- 0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601 004 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I PM2.5 I PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 1.9300e- i 0.0634 i 0.0148 1.8000e- i 3.9400e- 1.9000e- 4.1300e- i 1.0800e- 1.8000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 i 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e- i 0.0000 i 17.4869 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 9.7000e- 7.5000e- 8.5100e- 2.000Oe- 2.4700e- 2.000Oe- 2.4900e- 6.5000e- 2.000Oe- 6.7000e- 0.0000 i 2.2251 2.2251 7.000Oe- 0.0000 i 2.2267 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 2.9000e- 0.0641 0.0233 2.000Oe- 6.4100e- 2.1000e- 6.6200e- 1.7300e- 2.000Oe- 1.9300e- 0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e- 0.0000 19.7136 11 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 i 7.5100e- 0.0000 7.5100e- 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 003 003 Off -Road •i 0.0475 i 0.4716 i 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 i 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 i 0.0000 i 51.3600 004 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e- 0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600 004 003 1 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I PM2.5 I PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Hauling •I 1.9300e- I 0.0634 I 0.0148 11.8000e- 13.9400e- I 1.9000e- 14.1300e- I 1.0800e- 11.8000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 I 17.4566 I 17.4566 11.2100e- I 0.0000 i 17.4869 �I 003 I I I 004 I 003 I 004 I 003 I 003 I 004 003003 I I- I I I I I I I I I I I Vendor •I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I I I I I I I I- I I I Worker •I 9.7000e- 6.7000e- � 0.0000 I 2.2251 2.2251 0.0000 i 2.2267 17.5000e- 18.5100e- 12.00OOe- 12.4700e- 12.00OOe- 12.4900e- 16.5000e- 12.00OOe- I 17.00OOe- I 'I 004 I 004 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 004 I 005 004 005 � Total 2.9000e- 0.0641 0.0233 2.00OOe- 6.4100e- 2.1000e- 6.6200e- 1.7300e- 2.00OOe- 1.9300e- 0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e- 0.0000 19.7136 11 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Fugitive Dust •I I I I I 0.1807 I 0.0000 I 0.1807 I 0.0993 I 0.0000 0.0993 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I I I I I I 1 I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I I Off -Road •I 0.0389 I 0.4050 I 0.2115 13.8000e- I I 0.0204 I 0.0204 I I 0.0188 � 0.0188 � 0.0000 I 33.4357 I 33.4357 I 0.0108 I 0.0000 i 33.7061 004 I I I I 1 I I I I Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e- 0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I Hauling •I 0.0000 I I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I- I I I I I I I I I I I Vendor •I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •I 7.7000e- 1.9700e- 5.4000e- 0.0000 I 1.7801 1.7801 0.0000 i 1.7814 16.000Oe- 16.8100e- 12.000Oe- I 12.000Oe- 11.9900e- 15.2000e- 11.000Oe- I 15.000Oe- I 'I 004 I 004 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 004 I 005 004 005 � Total 7.7000e- 6.000Oe- 6.8100e- 2.000Oe- 1.9700e- 2.000Oe- 1.9900e- 5.2000e- 1.000Oe- 5.4000e- 0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.000Oe- 0.0000 1.7814 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Fugitive Dust •I I I I I 0.1807 I 0.0000 I 0.1807 I 0.0993 I 0.0000 0.0993 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I I I I I I 1 I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I I Off -Road •I 0.0389 I 0.4050 I 0.2115 13.8000e- I I 0.0204 I 0.0204 I I 0.0188 � 0.0188 � 0.0000 I 33.4357 I 33.4357 I 0.0108 I 0.0000 i 33.7060 004 I I I I 1 I I I I Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e- 0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 - ------------------------------------------'------------------ - - -- -- - -+-------------'--------------- ------- Worker •i 7.7000e- 6.00OOe- 6.8100e- 2.00OOe- 1.9700e- 2.00OOe- 1.9900e- 5.2000e- 1.00OOe- 5.4000e- 0.0000 i 1.7801 1.7801 5.00OOe- 0.0000 i 1.7814 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 7.7000e- 6.00OOe- 6.8100e- 2.00OOe- 1.9700e- 2.00OOe- 1.9900e- 5.2000e- 1.00OOe- 5.4000e- 0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.00OOe- 0.0000 1.7814 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 i 0.0693 i 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0796 i 0.8816 i 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 i 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 i 0.0000 i 104.3776 003 Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 1.6400e- 1.2700e- 0.0144 4.000Oe- 4.1600e- 3.000Oe- 4.2000e- 1.1100e- 3.000Oe- 1.1400e- 0.0000 i 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e- 0.0000 i 3.7607 i i i i i 003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 i Total 1.6400e- 1.2700e- 0.0144 4.000Oe- 4.1600e- 3.000Oe- 4.2000e- 1.1100e- 3.000Oe- 1.1400e- 0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e- 0.0000 3.7607 11 003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 i 0.0693 i 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0796 i 0.8816 i 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 i 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 i 0.0000 i 104.3775 003 Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 1.6400e- 1.2700e- 0.0144 4.00OOe- 4.1600e- 3.00OOe- 4.2000e- 1.1100e- 3.00OOe- 1.1400e- 0.0000 i 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e- 0.0000 i 3.7607 i i i i i 003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 i Total 1.6400e- 1.2700e- 0.0144 4.00OOe- 4.1600e- 3.00OOe- 4.2000e- 1.1100e- 3.00OOe- 1.1400e- 0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e- 0.0000 3.7607 11 003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i i i i 0.0807 i 0.0000 i 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 5.7200e- 5.7200e- 5.2600e- 5.2600e- 0.0000 i 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 i 19.2414 i i i 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 0.0807 5.7200e- 0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e- 0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 19.2414 004 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 2.8000e- 2.1000e- 2.4400e- 1.000Oe- 7.7000e- 1.000Oe- 7.7000e- 2.000Oe- 1.000Oe- 2.1000e- 0.0000 i 0.6679 0.6679 2.000Oe- 0.0000 i 0.6684 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Total 2.8000e- 2.1000e- 2.4400e- 1.0000e- 7.7000e- 1.000Oe- 7.7000e- 2.000Oe- 1.000Oe- 2.1000e- 0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.000Oe- 0.0000 0.6684 11 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i i i i 0.0807 i 0.0000 i 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 5.7200e- 5.7200e- 5.2600e- 5.2600e- 0.0000 i 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 i 19.2414 i i i 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 0.0807 5.7200e- 0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e- 0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 19.2414 004 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 2.8000e- 2.1000e- 2.4400e- 1.00OOe- 7.7000e- 1.00OOe- 7.7000e- 2.00OOe- 1.00OOe- 2.1000e- 0.0000 i 0.6679 0.6679 2.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.6684 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Total 2.8000e- 2.1000e- 2.4400e- 1.00OOe- 7.7000e- 1.00OOe- 7.7000e- 2.00OOe- 1.00OOe- 2.1000e- 0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.00OOe- 0.0000 0.6684 11 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.2158 i 1.9754 2.0700 i 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 i i 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 i 293.1324 i 293.1324 0.0702 i 0.0000 i 294.8881 003 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 ---------------- Vendor •i 0.0527 i 1.6961 i 0.4580 4.5500e- i 0.1140 3.1800e- 0.1171 i 0.0329 3.0400e- 0.0359 0.0000 i 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 i 0.0000 i 442.6435 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.4088 i 0.3066 i 3.5305 0.0107 i 1.1103 8.8700e- 1.1192 i 0.2949 8.1700e- 0.3031 0.0000 i 966.8117 966.8117 0.0266 i 0.0000 i 967.4773 003 003 Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 1,408.795 1,408.795 0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120 [777000 2 2 8 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.2158 i 1.9754 i 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 i 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 i 0.0000 i 294.8877 003 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 ---------------- Vendor •i 0.0527 i 1.6961 i 0.4580 4.5500e- i 0.1140 3.1800e- 0.1171 i 0.0329 3.0400e- 0.0359 0.0000 i 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 i 0.0000 i 442.6435 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.4088 i 0.3066 i 3.5305 0.0107 i 1.1103 8.8700e- 1.1192 i 0.2949 8.1700e- 0.3031 0.0000 i 966.8117 966.8117 0.0266 i 0.0000 i 967.4773 003 003 Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 1,408.795 1,408.795 0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120 [777000 2 2 8 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 0.1942 i 1.7765 i 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 i 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 i 0.0000 i 287.9814 003j Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814 003 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0382 i 1.2511 i 0.4011 4.3000e- i 0.1113 1.4600e- 0.1127 i 0.0321 1.4000e- 0.0335 0.0000 i 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 i 0.0000 i 418.5624 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.3753 i 0.2708 i 3.1696 0.0101 i 1.0840 8.4100e- 1.0924 i 0.2879 7.7400e- 0.2957 0.0000 i 909.3439 909.3439 0.0234 i 0.0000 i 909.9291 003 003 Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e- 1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e- 1,327.336 0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491 j 003 j j 003 j [-377000 9 [1,327.336 9 j 6 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 0.1942 i 1.7765 i 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 i 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 i 0.0000 i 287.9811 i i i i i • i i i i 003j Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811 003 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0382 i 1.2511 i 0.4011 4.3000e- i 0.1113 1.4600e- 0.1127 i 0.0321 1.4000e- 0.0335 0.0000 i 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 i 0.0000 i 418.5624 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.3753 i 0.2708 i 3.1696 0.0101 i 1.0840 8.4100e- 1.0924 i 0.2879 7.7400e- 0.2957 0.0000 i 909.3439 909.3439 0.0234 i 0.0000 i 909.9291 003 003 Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e- 1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e- 1,327.336 0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491 j 003 j j 003 j [-377000 9 [1,327.336 9 j 6 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 i 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 i 13.1227 i i i •� 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 1 m CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 --------------------------------------------'----------------------- -+ ----�-------------'--------------� Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 3.7000e- 2.7000e- 3.1200e- 1.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.000Oe- 1.0800e- 2.8000e- 1.000Oe- 2.9000e- 0.0000 i 0.8963 0.8963 2.000Oe- 0.0000 i 0.8968 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 3.7000e- 2.7000e- 3.1200e- 1.0000e- 1.0700e- 1.000Oe- 1.0800e- 2.8000e- 1.000Oe- 2.9000e- 0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.000Oe- 0.0000 0.8968 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 i 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 i 13.1227 i i i •� 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 1 m CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 ----------------------- ---------------------'------------------------ --+ ----� -------------'----00- ----00 1 000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 3.7000e- 2.7000e- 3.1200e- 1.00OOe- 1.0700e- 1.00OOe- 1.0800e- 2.8000e- 1.00OOe- 2.9000e- 0.0000 i 0.8963 0.8963 2.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.8968 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 3.7000e- 2.7000e- 3.1200e- 1.00OOe- 1.0700e- 1.00OOe- 1.0800e- 2.8000e- 1.00OOe- 2.9000e- 0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.00OOe- 0.0000 0.8968 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.0109 i 0.1048 0.1609 i 2.5000e- i i 5.1500e- i 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 i 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- i 0.0000 i 22.2073 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •1 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 22.2073 11 004 003 003 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 5.9000e- 4.1000e- 4.9200e- 2.000Oe- 1.8100e- 1.000Oe- 1.8200e- 4.8000e- 1.000Oe- 4.9000e- 0.0000 i 1.4697 1.4697 4.000Oe- 0.0000 i 1.4706 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 5.9000e- 4.1000e- 4.9200e- 2.000Oe- 1.8100e- 1.000Oe- 1.8200e- 4.8000e- 1.000Oe- 4.9000e- 0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.000Oe- 0.0000 1.4706 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 i 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 i 22.2073 i i i •� 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 11 004 003 003 003 003 003 m CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 - ------------------------------------------'------------------ - - -- -- - -+-------------'--------------- ------- Worker •i 5.9000e- 4.1000e- 4.9200e- 2.00OOe- 1.8100e- 1.00OOe- 1.8200e- 4.8000e- 1.00OOe- 4.9000e- 0.0000 i 1.4697 1.4697 4.00OOe- 0.0000 i 1.4706 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 5.9000e- 4.1000e- 4.9200e- 2.00OOe- 1.8100e- 1.00OOe- 1.8200e- 4.8000e- 1.00OOe- 4.9000e- 0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.00OOe- 0.0000 1.4706 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •1 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1600e- 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 i 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 i 4.4745 i i i 003 005 003 003 003 003 . 004 i Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.00OOe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 4.4745 005 003 003 003 003 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 ��--------------------------------------------'----------------------- -+ - -------------'--.--�-------T Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 '� I '� • I • Worker •i 0.0101 6.9900e- 0.0835 2.8000e- 0.0307 2.3000e- 0.0309 8.1500e- 2.2000e- 8.3700e- 0.0000 i 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e- 0.0000 i 24.9558 i i i i � i 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 i Total 0.0101 6.9900e- 0.0835 2.8000e- 0.0307 2.3000e- 0.0309 8.1500e- 2.2000e- 8.3700e- 0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1007 0.0000 24.9558 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •1 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1600e- 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 i 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 i 4.4745 i i i 003 005 003 003 003 003 . 004 i Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 4.4745 005 003 003 003 003 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I Worker •i 0.0101 6.9900e- 0.0835 2.8000e- 0.0307 2.3000e- 0.0309 8.1500e- 2.2000e- 8.3700e- 0.0000 i 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e- 0.0000 i 24.9558 i i i i � i 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 i Total 0.0101 6.9900e- 0.0835 2.8000e- 0.0307 2.3000e- 0.0309 8.1500e- 2.2000e- 8.3700e- 0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1007 0.0000 24.9558 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 1.5857 i 7.9962 i 19.1834 i 0.0821 i 7.7979 i 0.0580 7.8559 i 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 i 7,620.498 � 7,620.498 � 0.3407 i 0.0000 i 7,629.016 6 i 6 i i i 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 • 7,620.498 • 0.3407 - 0.0000 • 7,629.016 6 6 2 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total I Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 I CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity •1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 0.0000 I I I 0.0000 I I I 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 I I 12,512.646 1 2,512.646 I 0.1037 I 1 0.0215 i 2,521.635 Mitigated 5 1 5 1 1 1 6 •1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 • 1 1 I 1 Electricity •1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 0.0000 1 I 1 0.0000 I I I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 1 I 12,512.646 1 2,512.646 I 0.1037 I 1 0.0215 2,521.635 Unmitigated 5 1 5 1 I 1 6 •1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 • I 1 1 I 1 NaturalGas 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647 Miti 003 7 7 8gated • I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 • 1 1 I 1 NaturalGas 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- - 0.0966 0.0966 - 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 - 1,383.426 - 0.0265 - 0.0254 1,391.647 Unmitigated 003 7 7 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 I PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Apartments Low I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 i 408494 42.2000e- 1 0.0188 1 8.0100e- 1 1.2000e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1 1.5200e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1.5200e- � 0.0000 1 21.7988 1 21.7988 1 4.2000e- 1 4.000Oe- i 21.9284 Rise 1 '1 003 1 1 003 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 004 1 004 1 ; 1 1 r------�I------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � - 1 1 1 1 T Apartments Mid i 1.30613e .1 0.0704 1 0.6018 1 0.2561 1 3.8400e- 1 1 0.0487 1 0.0487 1 1 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 1 696.9989 1 696.9989 1 0.0134 1 0.0128 i 701.1408 Rise +007 ; 1 I I 003 _ 1 ; 1 r------71------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � - 1 1 1 1 T General Office Building i 468450 .1 2.5300e- 1 0.0230 1 0.0193 1 1.4000e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1 1.7500e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1.7500e- 0.0000 1 24.9983 1 24.9983 1 4.8000e- 1 4.6000e- i 25.1468 1 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 -----------1 '1-----------------------------------------------------------------------• 1------------------------1 High Turnover (Sit 8.30736e •1 0.0448 1 0.4072 1 0.3421 1 2.4400e- 1 1 0.0310 1 0.0310 1 1 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 1 443.3124 1 443.3124 1 8.5000e- 1 8.1300e- i 445.9468 Down Restaurant) 1 +006 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 ----------- Hotel ------ �'1------------------------------------------�-------�---------------� 1 �-------�-------�-------1 r71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �____--'I-------1 1 1 T____'-_ 1.74095e 9.3900e- 0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 0.0000 1 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e- 1.7000e- 93.4557 1 .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 __ " '-" "I Quality 1 j-------i-------i-------i-------i--------------- i------- i---------------. 1 �-------�-------�-------' r------71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �____--'I-------1 1 1 T____'-_ 1 1.84608e •1 9.9500e- 0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e- 1.8100e- 1 99.0993 Restaurant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 __t------71-------1 1 , I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 - 1 I I I T_____-_ Regional Shopping Centers i 91840 .1 5.000Oe- 1 4.5000e- 1 3.7800e- 1 3.000Oe- 1 1 3.4000e- 1 3.4000e- 1 1 3.4000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1 4.9009 1 4.9009 1 9.000Oe- 1 9.000Oe- i 4.9301 004 1 003 1 003 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 . 1 1 005 1 005 1 Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647 003 8 8 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 I PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 i 408494 42.2000e- 1 0.0188 1 8.0100e- 1 1.2000e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1 1.5200e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1.5200e- � 0.0000 1 21.7988 1 21.7988 1 4.2000e- 1 4.000Oe- i 21.9284 Rise 1 '1 003 1 1 003 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 004 1 004 1 1 ; 1 r------�I------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , - 1 1 1 1 T Apartments Mid i 1.30613e .1 0.0704 1 0.6018 1 0.2561 1 3.8400e- 1 1 0.0487 1 0.0487 1 1 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 1 696.9989 1 696.9989 1 0.0134 1 0.0128 i 701.1408 Rise +007 ; 1 I I 003 _ 1 ; 1 r------71------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , - 1 1 1 1 T General Office Building i 468450 .1 2.5300e- 1 0.0230 1 0.0193 1 1.4000e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1 1.7500e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1.7500e- 0.0000 1 24.9983 1 24.9983 1 4.8000e- 1 4.6000e- i 25.1468 1 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 -----------1 '1-----------------------------------------------------------------------• 1------------------------1 High Turnover (Sit 8.30736e .1 0.0448 1 0.4072 1 0.3421 1 2.4400e- 1 1 0.0310 1 0.0310 1 1 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 1 443.3124 1 443.3124 1 8.5000e- 1 8.1300e- i 445.9468 Down Restaurant) 1 +006 i 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 ----------- Hotel ------ �'1------------------------------------------�-------�---------------� 1 �-------�------- -------1 r71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , �____--'I-------1 1 1 ------- 1.74095e •1 9.3900e- 0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 0.0000 1 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e- 1.7000e- 93.4557 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -""'-""i Quality '1 j-------i-------i-------i-------i--------------- i------- i---------------��1 �-------�-------�-------1 r-------------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , ____--'I-------1 1 1 T_----- 71 1.84608e •1 9.9500e- 0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e- 1.8100e- 99.0993 Restaurant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 __t------71-------1 1 , I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 - 1 I I I T_____-_ Regional Shopping Centers i 91840 •1 5.000Oe- 1 4.5000e- 1 3.7800e- 1 3.000Oe- 1 1 3.4000e- 1 3.4000e- 1 1 3.4000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1 4.9009 1 4.9009 1 9.000Oe- 1 9.000Oe- i 4.9301 ; 004 1 003 1 003 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 . 1 1 005 1 005 1 Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647 003 8 8 j j 8 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Use Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 106010 •i 33.7770 i 1.3900e- 2.9000e- 33.8978 Rise 003 004 i --�------it------ Apartments Mid •---------------- *------- 3.94697e •i 1,257.587 i 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086 Rise +006 9 i i i 9 General Office -j--------j------- i 584550 •i 186.2502 i 7.6900e- 1.5900e- 186.9165 Building 003 003 High Turnover (Sit -j- - - - - --- - - - - - - 1.58904e •1 506.3022 i 0.0209 4.3200e- 508.1135 Down Restaurant) i +006 003 -- Hotel -----•--------------- -ii------- i 550308 •1 175.3399 i 7.2400e- 1.5000e- 175.9672 003 003 - Quality •�- - - - - --- - - - - -- ------ii------- 353120 •1 112.5116 i 4.6500e- 9.6000e- 112.9141 Restaurant ;1 i 003 i 004 Regional 756000 •i 240.8778 i 9.9400e- 2.0600e- T 241.7395 Shopping Center 003 i 003 Total 2,512.646 0.1037 0.0215 2:521.635 5 6 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 35 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Mitigated Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Use Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 106010 •i 33.7770 i 1.3900e- 2.9000e- 33.8978 Rise 003 004 i Apartments Mid • ---------------- 3.94697e •i 1,257.587 i 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086 Rise +006 9 i i i 9 General Office -j--------j------- i 584550 •i 186.2502 i 7.6900e- 1.5900e- 186.9165 Building 003 003 High Turnover (Sit -j- - - - - --- - - - - - - 1.58904e •1 506.3022 i 0.0209 4.3200e- 508.1135 Down Restaurant) i +006 003 ---r--- Hotel ------- *------- ---ii•--------------- i 550308 •1 175.3399 i 7.2400e- 1.5000e- 175.9672 003 003 --- Quality •�- - - - - --- r------ii------- *------- 353120 •1 112.5116 i 4.6500e- 9.6000e- 112.9141 Restaurant ;1 003 i 004 Regional -------------- 756000 •i 240.8778 i 9.9400e- 2.0600e- 241.7395 Shopping Center 003 i 003 Total 2,512.646�71037 0.0215 2,521.635 5 6 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 36 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 � 10.3804 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 i i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 � 220.9670 i 0.0201 � 3.7400e- 1 222.5835 003 003 Unmitigated 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e- - 0.0714 - 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 - 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.4137 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Coating % ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------*------- Consumer �� 4.3998 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 0.0206 i 0.1763 0.0750 i 1.1200e- i 0.0143 i 0.0143 i 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 i 204.1166 204.1166 i 3.9100e- 3.7400e- i 205.3295 •� 003 003 003 i . Landscaping •i 0.3096 i 0.1187 10.3054 i 5.4000e- i 0.0572 i 0.0572 i 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 i 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 i 17.2540 i 004 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e- 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 37 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.4137 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 4.3998 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 0.0206 i 0.1763 0.0750 i 1.1200e- 0.0143 i 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 i 204.1166 204.1166 i 3.9100e- 3.7400e- 205.3295 003 003 003 i Landscaping •i 0.3096 i 0.1187 10.3054 i 5.4000e- i 0.0572 i 0.0572 i 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 i 16.8504 16.8504 i 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540 004 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e- 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 11 003 003 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 38 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated •1 585.8052 i 3.0183 i 0.0755 i 683.7567 - - - - - - - - - - - % --------------4------------------------------- - - - - - - - Unmitigated •• 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 39 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e door Use Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Low 1.62885 / •1 10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e- 12.6471 Rise 1.02688 ;i i 003 '-------- -------- ------- Apartments Mid 1 63.5252 / •1 425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363 Rise 40.0485 ; -- - - - --- - - - - - - General Office 1 7.99802 / •i 53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e- i 61.6019 Building 4.90201 ;i i 003 - - - - - - - ------- -j------- --------- - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit 10.9272 / •i 51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e- 62.8482 Down Restaurant) i 0.697482 ;i i 003 ' -------- ------- Hotel i 1.26834 / •1 6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e- i 7.5079 0.140927 'i 003 -- - - - - --- - - - - - - Quality 2.42827 / •i 11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e- 13.9663 Restaurant i 0.154996 ;i i 003 ---------- --------------- Regional 4.14806 / •i 27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e- 31.9490 Shopping Center 2.54236 ;i i 003 Total 585.8052 j 3.0183 j 0.0755 683.7567 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 40 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e door Use Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Low 1.62885 / •1 10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e- 12.6471 Rise 1.02688 ;i i 003 '-------- -------- ------- Apartments Mid 1 63.5252 / •1 425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363 Rise 40.0485 ; -- - - - --- - - - - - - General Office 1 7.99802 / •i 53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e- i 61.6019 Building 4.90201 ;i 003 --r- ----- ------- -j--------------- * - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit 10.9272 / •i 51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e- 62.8482 Down Restaurant) i 0.697482 ;i i 003 ' -------- ------- Hotel i 1.26834 / •1 6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e- i 7.5079 0.140927 'i 003 -- - - - - --- - - - - - - Quality 2.42827 / •i 11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e- 13.9663 Restaurant i 0.154996 ;i i 003 ---------- --------------- Regional 4.14806 / •i 27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e- 31.9490 Shopping Center 2.54236 ;i i 003 Total 585.8052 j 3.0183 j 0.0755 683.7567 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 41 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual CategoryNear Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e MT/yr Mitigated •i 207.8079 i 12.2811 i 0.0000 1 514.8354 - - - - - - - - - - - % --------------+------------------------------ - - - - - - - Unmitigated •• 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 42 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Disposed Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Low 11.5 •1 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834 Rise •� i • '-------'------- Apartments Mid i 448.5 •i 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 i 225.5513 Rise •� -------- i -------- ------- '------- GeneralOffice i 41.85 •1 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 i 21.0464 Building i •� - ------ �i------- '------- '------- *------- High Turnover (Sit 428.4 •1 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430 Down Restaurant)1 •� • '-------'------- Hotel i 27.38 •1 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 i 13.7694 __ i i Quality 7.3 •i 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712 Restaurant i •� • -------- ------- 58.8 •i 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706 Shopping Center i •� Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 43 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Mitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Disposed Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Low 11.5 •1 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834 Rise •� i • '-------'------- Apartments Mid i 448.5 •i 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 i 225.5513 Rise •� -------- i -------- ------- '------- GeneralOffice i 41.85 •1 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 i 21.0464 Building i •� - ------ �i------- '------- '------- *------- High Turnover (Sit 428.4 •1 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430 Down Restaurant)1 •� '-------'------- Hotel i 27.38 •1 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 i 13.7694 __ i i Quality 7.3 •i 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712 Restaurant i •� • - ' - - - - - - -'- - - - - - - Regional 58.8 •i 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706 Shopping Center i •� Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 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 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 44 of 44 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_ h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 High ----------------------- - - - - -- = - - ;------- - - - - --- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 + -----------------------------_------------------------------_- Hotel 50.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = - ---;-------------- - - - - - - Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 ------ - - - --y----------------_------------------------------_- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = --- ----;-------------- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 _ --- - - - - -p--------------------_------------------------------ A Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + ----------------------------- = --- ----;------------- - - - - - - Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 ---- - - - - ---------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------= Apartments artments Mid Rise 975.00 + ----- -------- --------- -i------------------+--------------- Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------_------------------------------_ ----------------------- - - - - -- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM 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 FireplaceWood Mass IT 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ -------------------------- NumberWood r 1.25 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------r----------------------------- ------------------------- NumberWood 48.75 0.00 ---------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------ ------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 158.37 79.82 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 94.36 63.99 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 49.97 10.74 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 6.07 6.16 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- SU_TR 5.86 4.18 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 1.05 0.69 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- SU_TR 131.84 78.27 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- SU_TR �-----------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2769 i 46.4588 31.6840 i 0.0643 18.2675 2.0461 i 20.3135 9.9840 i 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 i 6,234.797 6,234.797 i 1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535 4 i 4 i i 2 2022 •i 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 i 15,251.56 15,251.56 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52 i i i i i •� 74 74 i 88 2023 •i 4.8957 i 26.3317 46.7567 i 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 i 10.6482 2.6381 i 0.7322 3.3702 0.0000 i 14,807.52 14,807.52 i 1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15 2024 •1 237.1630 i 9.5575 15.1043 i 0.0244 1.7884 0.4698 i 1.8628 0.4743 i 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 i 2,361.398 2,361.398 i 0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342 9 i 9 i i i 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 15,251.56 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52 11 74 74 88 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0.0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 i 6,234.797 6,234.797 1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535 i i i i i 4 i 4 i i 2 2022 •i 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 i 15,251.56 15,251.56 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52 i i i i i •� 74 74 i 88 2023 •i 4.8957 i 26.3317 46.7567 i 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 i 10.6482 2.6381 i 0.7322 3.3702 0.0000 i 14,807.52 14,807.52 i 1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15 2024 •1 237.1630 i 9.5575 15.1043 i 0.0244 1.7884 0.4698 i 1.8628 0.4743 i 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 i 2,361.398 2,361.398 i 0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342 9 i 9 i i i 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 15,251.56 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52 74 74 88 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 i i � � i � i i 50 50 i 92 --------------- Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 i 2 i i i 7 Mobile •1 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 i 46.2951 12.2950 i 0.3119 12.6070 i 50,306.60 50,306.60 i 2.1807 50,361.12 08 34 i 34 � � i Total 41.1168 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18 76,811.18 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87 11 762 16 16 86 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 88.4430 i 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 i 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 �� ■ 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 i 8,405.638 '� i i i i i i i i i i i ■ 2 2 i 7 Mobile 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 i 46.2951 12.2950 i 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 50,306.60 i 2.1807 i 50,361.12 i ■ 34 34 i 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 76,811.18 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87 16 16 86 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 110/12/2021 5 30: i i _ 2 Site Preparation +Site Preparation !10/13/2021 i11/9/2021 5 20: i i _ 3 •Grading +Grading !11/10/2021 i1/11/2022 5 45: i i _ 4 •Building Construction +Building Construction ! 1/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: i i _ 5 :Paving +Paving ! 12/13/2023 i 1/30/2024 5: 35: + I 1 1 6 -Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating -1/31/2024 -3/19/2024 5, 35- Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00 0.001 458.00; 14.70: 6.90; 20.00;LD_Mix IHDT_Mix EHHDT ------------- Site Preparation 7; -----_-_, 18.00: --------i 0.001 0.00: --------- 14.70: ------------------------ 6.90; 20.00;LD_Mix ----------r--------_ ;HDT_Mix ?HHDT �- --------------- ° Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 14.70: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 14.70: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 14.70: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f I Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 14.70, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust ;1 , , , , 3.3074 , 0.0000 , 3.3074 , 0.5008 , 0.0000 ; 0.5008 � i , 0.0000 , , i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 , 31.4407 , 21.5650 , 0.0388 , , 1.5513 , 1.5513 , , 1.4411 ; 1.4411 i 3,747.944 , 3,747.944 , 1.0549 , i 3,774.317 9 i 9 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3:774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241 1,292.241 0.0877 i 1,294.433 i i � i i � � i '� i i i i i i i i • 3 i 3 i i i 7 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0643 i 0.0442 i 0.6042 1.7100e- i 0.1677 1.3500e- 0.1690 i 0.0445 1.2500e- 0.0457 i 170.8155 170.8155 5.0300e- i 1 170.9413 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.0927 1,465.375 f-77771,463.056 8 17,463.056 8 1 0 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 i 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 i 31.4407 i 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 i 3,747.944 3,747.944 1.0549 i i 3,774.317 '� i i i i i i i i i i i • 9 9 i 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3,774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 i 1,292.241 1,292.241 0.0877 i 1,294.433 i i � i i • � � i '� i i i i i i i i • 3 i 3 i i i 7 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0643 i 0.0442 i 0.6042 1.7100e- i 0.1677 1.3500e- 0.1690 i 0.0445 1.2500e- 0.0457 i 170.8155 170.8155 5.0300e- i 1 170.9413 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.0927 1,465.375 f-77771,463.056 8 17,463.056 8 1 0 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 i 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 � 0.0380 i � 2.0445 � 2.0445 i � 1.8809 � 1.8809 � i 3,685.656 � 3,685.656 � 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 '� i i i i i i i i i • g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0772 i 0.0530 i 0.7250 2.0600e- i 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 i 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e- i i 205.1296 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e- 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e- 205.1296 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 i 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 i 3,685.656 3,685.656 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 i g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0772 i 0.0530 i 0.7250 2.0600e- i 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 i 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e- i i 205.1296 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e- 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e- 205.1296 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 � 0.0620 i � 1.9853 � 1.9853 i � 1.8265 � 1.8265 � i 6,007.043 � 6,007.043 � 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 777 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0857 i 0.0589 i 0.8056 2.2900e- i 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 i 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e- i i 227.9217 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e- 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e- 227.9217 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 i 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 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 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0857 i 0.0589 i 0.8056 2.2900e- i 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 i 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e- i i 227.9217 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e- 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e- 227.9217 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 � 0.0621 i � 1.6349 � 1.6349 i � 1.5041 1.5041 � i 6,011.410 � 6,011.410 � 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i 5 5 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0803 i 0.0532 i 0.7432 2.2100e- i 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 i 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e- i i 219.8941 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e- 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e- 219.8941 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 i 6,011.410 6,011.410 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0803 i 0.0532 i 0.7432 2.2100e- i 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 i 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e- i i 219.8941 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e- 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e- 219.8941 003 003 003 003 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 i 0.0269 0.8090 i 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.4079 i 13.2032 i 3.4341 � 0.0364 i 0.9155 � 0.0248 0.9404 i 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548 3,896.548 0.2236 i i 3,902.138 2 i 2 i i i 4 Worker •i 3.2162 i 2.1318 i 29.7654 0.0883 i 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 i 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 i 8,800.685 8,800.685 0.2429 i i 8,806.758 7 i 7 i i i 2 Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 12,697.23 0.4665 12,708.89 j j j j [77712,697.23 39 39 j 66 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 i 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.4079 i 13.2032 i 3.4341 � 0.0364 i 0.9155 � 0.0248 0.9404 i 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548 3,896.548 0.2236 i i 3,902.138 2 i 2 i i i 4 Worker •i 3.2162 i 2.1318 i 29.7654 0.0883 i 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 i 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 i 8,800.685 8,800.685 0.2429 i i 8,806.758 7 i 7 i i i 2 Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 12,697.23 0.4665 12,708.89 j j j j [77712,697.23 39 39 j 66 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 � i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 i i i i i i i i 9 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.658T 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 j j j j j j 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3027 i 10.0181 i 3.1014 0.0352 i 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 i 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 i 3,773.876 3,773.876 0.1982 i i 3,778.830 2 i 2 i i i 0 Worker •i 3.0203 i 1.9287 i 27.4113 0.0851 i 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 i 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440 8,478.440 0.2190 i i 8,483.916 8 i 8 i i i 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 12,252.31 0.4172 12,262.74 70 70 60 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 9 i 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 11 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3027 i 10.0181 i 3.1014 0.0352 i 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 i 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 i 3,773.876 3,773.876 0.1982 i i 3,778.830 2 i 2 i i 1 0 Worker •i 3.0203 i 1.9287 i 27.4113 0.0851 i 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 i 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440 8,478.440 0.2190 i i 8,483.916 8 i 8 i i i 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 12,252.31 0.4172 12,262.74 70 70 60 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 '� i i i i i i i i 1 i 1 i i i 6 • Paving •i 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 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0566 i 0.0361 i 0.5133 1.5900e- i 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e- i i 158.8748 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e- 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e- 158.8748 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 i 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 1 i 1 i i i 6 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 11 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0566 i 0.0361 i 0.5133 1.5900e- i 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e- i i 158.8748 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e- 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e- 158.8748 003 003 003 003 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 14.6258 i 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 i i 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0535 i 0.0329 i 0.4785 1.5400e- i 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 i 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e- i i 153.9458 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e- 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e- 153.9458 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 i 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 i 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0535 i 0.0329 i 0.4785 1.5400e- i 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 i 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e- i i 153.9458 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e- 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e- 153.9458 003 003 003 003 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •i 236.4115 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 i 2.9700e- i i 0.0609 i 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 i 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 ��--------------------------------------------'----------------------- -+ ------� -------------'--------------- Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.5707 i 0.3513 i 5.1044 0.0165 i 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 i 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 i 1,641.085 1,641.085 0.0401 i i 1,642.088 2 i 2 i i i 6 Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 777 1,641.085 1,641.085 0.0401 1,642.088 2 2 6 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •1 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 i 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � ---------------------------------------------'------------------------ --+ ------� -------------'--------------- Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.5707 i 0.3513 i 5.1044 0.0165 i 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 i 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 i 1,641.085 1,641.085 0.0401 i i 1,642.088 2 i 2 i i i 6 Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 777 1,641.085 1,641.085 0.0401 1,642.088 2 2 6 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 i 45.9592 i 0.3360 46.2951 i 12.2950 � 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 50,306.60 2.1807 i i 50,361.12 •� . 34 34 i 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 • 50,306.60 • 2.1807 - 50,361.12 34 34 08 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 i 4.2573 0.0418 i i 0.5292 0.5292 i i 0.5292 0.5292 + i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 i 0.1532 1 8,405.638 Mitigated ;i . i 2 2 i 7 NaturalGas 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 • 8,355.983 • 0.1602 0.1532 • 8,405.638 Unmitigated 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1119.16 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid 35784.3 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1------------------------------------------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------ � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1283.42 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22759.9 •1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r-------1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4769.72 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 1 1 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 Quality 1 5057.75 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � v 1 1 1 1 T""--- 251.616 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1.11916 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid i 35.7843 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1 1------- ----------------------------- -------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------71_----__ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1.28342 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22.7599 .1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r------�1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4.76972 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 I I 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 -r------71 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 ------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �-------I-------1 1 1 T'------ Quality 5.05775 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T""--- 0.251616 •1 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 077 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 � 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 i i 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 50 50 92 -------------i i Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 • 18,148.59 - 0.4874 • 0.3300 • 18,259.11 50 50 92 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating•' ' i %i- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------*------- Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products •' . ' i Hearth •i 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 18,000.00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96 i i i i i i i Landscaping •i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 i 152.1542 003 i i i i i i i i i • Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 50 50 92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 1.6500 i 14.1000 6.0000 i 0.0900 1.1400 i 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 i 18,000.00 18,000.00 i 0.3450 1 0.3300 1 18,106.96 ---- -- - - - ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - --- - -- ------------------------------ Landscaping i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 152.1542 003 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 j j F-777000 50 50 j 92 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 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 Page 35 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Fire Pumos and Emeraencv Generators IEquipment Type I Number I Hours/Day I Hours/Year I Horse Power I Load Factor I Fuel Type I Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_ h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 High ----------------------- - - - - -- = - - ;------- - - - - --- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 + -----------------------------_------------------------------_- Hotel 50.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = - ---;-------------- - - - - - - Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 ------ - - - --y----------------_------------------------------_- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = --- ----;-------------- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 _ --- - - - - -p--------------------_------------------------------ A Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + ----------------------------- = --- ----;------------- - - - - - - Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 ---- - - - - ---------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------= Apartments artments Mid Rise 975.00 + ----- -------- --------- -i------------------+--------------- Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------_------------------------------_ ----------------------- - - - - -- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM 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 FireplaceWood Mass IT 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ -------------------------- NumberWood r 1.25 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------r----------------------------- ------------------------- NumberWood 48.75 0.00 ---------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------ ------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 158.37 79.82 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips -------------------------------------- ST_TR r 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 94.36 63.99 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 49.97 10.74 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 6.07 6.16 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- SU_TR 5.86 4.18 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- SU_TR r 1.05 0.69 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- SU_TR 131.84 78.27 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- SU_TR �-----------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2865 i 46.4651 31.6150 i 0.0642 18.2675 2.0461 i 20.3135 9.9840 i 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 i 6,221.493 6,221.493 i 1.9491 � 0.0000 6,270.221 7 i 7 i i 4 2022 •i 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 i 14,630.30 14,630.30 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26 i i i i i 99 99 63 2023 •i 5.2705 i 26.4914 � 44.5936 i 0.1413 � 9.8688 � 0.7800 i 10.6488 � 2.6381 i 0.7328 3.3708 � 0.0000 i 14,210.34 � 14,210.34 i 1.0230 � 0.0000 � 14,235.91 •� i i � � i � i � � i 24 i 24 i 60 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------*-------� -------------------------------*------- 2024 •1 237.2328 i 9.5610 15.0611 i 0.0243 1.7884 0.4698 i 1.8628 0.4743 i 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 i 2,352.417 2,352.417 i 0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355 8 i 8 i i i 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 14,630.30 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26 11 99 99 63 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2865 i 46.4651 31.6150 i 0.0642 18.2675 2.0461 i 20.3135 9.9840 i 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 i 6,221.493 6,221.493 i 1.9491 � 0.0000 6,270.221 7 i 7 i i 4 2022 •i 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 i 14,630.30 14,630.30 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26 i i i i i 99 99 63 2023 •i 5.2705 i 26.4914 � 44.5936 i 0.1413 � 9.8688 � 0.7800 i 10.6488 � 2.6381 i 0.7328 3.3708 � 0.0000 i 14,210.34 � 14,210.34 i 1.0230 � 0.0000 � 14,235.91 •� i i � � i � i � � i 24 i 24 i 60 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------*-------� -------------------------------*------- 2024 •1 237.2328 i 9.5610 15.0611 i 0.0243 1.7884 0.4698 i 1.8628 0.4743 i 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 i 2,352.417 2,352.417 i 0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355 8 i 8 i i i 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 14,630.30 1.94 99 0.0000 14,657.26 99 99 63 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 i i � � i � i i 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 i 2 i i i 7 Mobile •i 9.5233 i 45.9914 � 110.0422 i 0.4681 � 45.9592 � 0.3373 i 46.2965 � 12.2950 i 0.3132 12.6083 i 47,917.80 � 47,917.80 i 2.1953 � � 47,972.68 '� 05 05 i 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 74,422.37 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44 87 87 17 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 88.4430 i 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 i 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 �� ■ 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 i 8,405.638 '� i i i i i i i i i i i ■ 2 2 i 7 Mobile 9.5233 i 45.9914 110.0422 i 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 i 46.2965 12.2950 i 0.3132 12.6083 � 47,917.80 47,917.80 i 2.1953 47,972.68 i ■ 05 05 i 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 74,422.37 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44 87 87 17 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 110/12/2021 5 30: i i _ 2 Site Preparation +Site Preparation !10/13/2021 i11/9/2021 5 20: i i _ 3 •Grading +Grading !11/10/2021 i1/11/2022 5 45: i i _ 4 •Building Construction +Building Construction ! 1/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: i i _ 5 :Paving +Paving ! 12/13/2023 i 1/30/2024 5: 35: + I 1 1 6 -Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating -1/31/2024 -3/19/2024 5, 35- Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00" 0.001 458.00; 14.70: 6.90; 20.00:LD_Mix 1HDT_Mix (HHDT ------------- Site Preparation 7; -----_--, 18.00: --------i 0.001 0.00: --------- 14.70: ------------------------ 6.90; 20.00;LD_Mix ----------r--------_ ;HDT_Mix ;HHDT �- --------------- ° Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 14.70: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 14.70: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 14.70: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f I Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 14.70, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust ;1 , , , , 3.3074 , 0.0000 , 3.3074 , 0.5008 , 0.0000 ; 0.5008 � i , 0.0000 , , i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 , 31.4407 , 21.5650 , 0.0388 , , 1.5513 , 1.5513 , , 1.4411 ; 1.4411 i 3,747.944 , 3,747.944 , 1.0549 , i 3,774.317 9 i 9 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3:774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855 1,269.855 0.0908 i 1,272.125 i i � i � i i '� i i i i i i i i • 5 i 5 i i i 2 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0715 i 0.0489 i 0.5524 1.6100e- i 0.1677 1.3500e- 0.1690 i 0.0445 1.2500e- 0.0457 i 160.8377 160.8377 4.7300e- i 1 160.9560 003 003 003 003 1 Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693 1,430.693 0.0955 1,433.081 2 2 2 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 i 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 i 31.4407 i 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 i 3,747.944 3,747.944 1.0549 i i 3,774.317 '� i i i i i i i i i i i • 9 9 i 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3,774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 i 1,269.855 1,269.855 0.0908 i 1,272.125 i i � i � i • i '� i i i i i i i i • 5 i 5 i i i 2 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0715 i 0.0489 i 0.5524 1.6100e- i 0.1677 1.3500e- 0.1690 i 0.0445 1.2500e- 0.0457 i 160.8377 160.8377 4.7300e- i 1 160.9560 003 003 003 003 1 Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693 1,430.693 0.0955 1,433.081 2 2 2 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 i 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 � 0.0380 i � 2.0445 � 2.0445 i � 1.8809 � 1.8809 � i 3,685.656 � 3,685.656 � 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 '� i i i i i i i i • g i 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0858 i 0.0587 i 0.6629 1.9400e- i 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 i 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e- i i 193.1472 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e- 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e- 193.1472 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 i 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 i 3,685.656 3,685.656 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 i g g 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0858 i 0.0587 i 0.6629 1.9400e- i 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 i 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e- i i 193.1472 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e- 0.2012 1.6300e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e- 0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e- 193.1472 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 � 0.0620 i � 1.9853 � 1.9853 i � 1.8265 � 1.8265 � i 6,007.043 � 6,007.043 � 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 777 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0954 i 0.0652 i 0.7365 2.1500e- i 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 i 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e- i i 214.6080 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e- 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e- 214.6080 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 i 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 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 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0954 i 0.0652 i 0.7365 2.1500e- i 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 i 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e- i i 214.6080 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e- 0.2236 1.8100e- 0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e- 0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e- 214.6080 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 � 0.0621 i � 1.6349 � 1.6349 i � 1.5041 1.5041 � i 6,011.410 � 6,011.410 � 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i 5 5 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0896 i 0.0589 i 0.6784 2.0800e- i 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 i 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e- i i 207.0563 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e- 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e- 207.0563 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 i 6,011.410 6,011.410 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0896 i 0.0589 i 0.6784 2.0800e- i 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 i 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e- i i 207.0563 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e- 0.2236 1.7500e- 0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e- 0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e- 207.0563 003 003 003 003 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 i 0.0269 0.8090 i 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.4284 i 13.1673 i 3.8005 � 0.0354 i 0.9155 � 0.0256 0.9412 i 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 3,789.075 0.2381 i i 3,795.028 0 i 0 i i i 3 Worker •i 3.5872 i 2.3593 i 27.1680 0.0832 i 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 i 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 i 8,286.901 8,286.901 0.2282 i i 8,292.605 3 i 3 i i i 8 Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 12,075.97 0.4663 12,087.63 [77712,075.97 63 63 41 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 i 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.4284 i 13.1673 i 3.8005 � 0.0354 i 0.9155 � 0.0256 0.9412 i 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 3,789.075 0.2381 i i 3,795.028 0 i 0 i i i 3 Worker •i 3.5872 i 2.3593 i 27.1680 0.0832 i 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 i 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 i 8,286.901 8,286.901 0.2282 i i 8,292.605 3 i 3 i i i 8 Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 12,075.97 0.4663 12,087.63 [77712,075.97 63 63 41 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 � i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 i i i i i i i i 9 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.658T 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 j j j j j j 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3183 i 9.9726 i 3.3771 0.0343 i 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 i 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 i 3,671.400 3,671.400 0.2096 i i 3,676.641 7 i 7 i i i 7 Worker •i 3.3795 i 2.1338 i 24.9725 0.0801 i 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 i 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731 � 7,983.731 0.2055 i i 7,988.868 8 i 8 i i i 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 11,655.13 0.4151 11,665.50 j j j j 25 25 j 99 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 9 i 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 11 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3183 i 9.9726 i 3.3771 0.0343 i 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 i 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 i 3,671.400 3,671.400 0.2096 i i 3,676.641 '� i i i i i i i i • 7 i 7 i i i 7 Worker •i 3.3795 i 2.1338 i 24.9725 0.0801 i 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 i 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731 � 7,983.731 0.2055 i i 7,988.868 8 i 8 i i i 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 11,655.13 0.4151 11,665.50 j j j j 25 25 j 99 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 '� i i i i i i i i • 1 i 1 i i i 6 Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0633 i 0.0400 i 0.4677 � 1.5000e- i 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e- i i 149.6043 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e- 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e- 149.6043 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 i 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 1 i 1 i i i 6 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 11 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0633 i 0.0400 i 0.4677 � 1.5000e- i 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e- i i 149.6043 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e- 0.1677 1.2800e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e- 0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e- 149.6043 003 003 003 003 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 14.6258 i 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 i i 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 i 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0601 i 0.0364 i 0.4354 1.4500e- i 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e- i i 144.9587 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e- 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e- 144.9587 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 i 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 i 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0601 i 0.0364 i 0.4354 1.4500e- i 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 i 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e- i i 144.9587 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e- 0.1677 1.2600e- 0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e- 0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e- 144.9587 003 003 003 003 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •i 236.4115 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 i 2.9700e- i i 0.0609 i 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 i 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.6406 i 0.3886 i 4.6439 0.0155 i 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 i 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 i 1,545.286 1,545.286 0.0376 1,546.226 0 i 0 i i i 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 1,545.286 0.0376 7546.226 0 0 2 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •1 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I Off -Road •1 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 i 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.6406 i 0.3886 i 4.6439 0.0155 i 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 i 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 i 1,545.286 1,545.286 0.0376 1,546.226 0 i 0 i i i 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 1,545.286 0.0376 7546.226 0 0 2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 9.5233 i 45.9914 i 110.0422 i 0.4681 45.9592 i 0.3373 , 46.2965 i 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 i 47,917.80 47,917.80 2.1953 i : 47,972.68 •� . 05 05 i 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 47,917.80 • 2.1953 - 47,972.68 05 05 39 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 i 4.2573 0.0418 i i 0.5292 0.5292 i i 0.5292 0.5292 + i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 i 0.1532 1 8,405.638 Mitigated ;i . i 2 2 i 7 NaturalGas 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 • 8,355.983 • 0.1602 0.1532 • 8,405.638 Unmitigated 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1119.16 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid 35784.3 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1------------------------------------------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------ � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1283.42 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22759.9 •1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r-------1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4769.72 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 1 1 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 Quality 1 5057.75 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � v 1 1 1 1 T""--- 251.616 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1.11916 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid i 35.7843 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1 1------- ----------------------------- -------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------71_----__ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1.28342 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22.7599 .1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r------�1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4.76972 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 I I 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 -r------71 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 ------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �-------I-------1 1 1 T'------ Quality 5.05775 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T""--- 0.251616 •1 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 077 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 � 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 i i 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 50 50 92 -------------i i Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 • 18,148.59 - 0.4874 • 0.3300 • 18,259.11 50 50 92 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating•' ' i %i- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------*------- Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products •' . ' i Hearth •i 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 18,000.00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96 i i i i i i i Landscaping •i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 i 152.1542 003 i i i i i i i i i • Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 50 50 92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 1.6500 i 14.1000 6.0000 i 0.0900 1.1400 i 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 i 18,000.00 18,000.00 i 0.3450 1 0.3300 1 18,106.96 ---- -- - - - ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - --- - -- ------------------------------ Landscaping i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 152.1542 003 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 j j F-777000 50 50 j 92 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 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 Page 35 of 35 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Fire Pumos and Emeraencv Generators IEquipment Type I Number I Hours/Day I Hours/Year I Horse Power I Load Factor I Fuel Type I Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ---------------------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- - h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 + High = — — ;-------------------- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 -----------------------------_------------------------------ _------------------------------ Hotel 50.00 + = — -- —;------------- ------- Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 -----------y----------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + = --- ---—;-------------------- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_----------------------------- Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + = --- --------- —;------------- Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 -----------------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------=-----------------------i------------------+--------------- Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 + Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------ _------------------------------ _----------------------------- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM 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 FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces -----r------------------------------ FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- NumberWood 1.25 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ ------------------------- NumberWood r 48.75 0.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------r----------------------------- -------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- ST_TR 158.37 79.82 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- ST_TR �-----------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year tons/yr MT/yr 2021 •i 0.1704 i 1.8234 � 1.1577 i 2.3800e- 0.4141 � 0.0817 i 0.4958 0.1788 i 0.0754 0.2542 0.0000 i 210.7654 210.7654 i 0.0600 0.0000 212.2661 003 2022 •i 0.5865 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 i 1,418.655 1,418.655 0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692 i i i i i 2023 •i 0.5190 i 3.2850 � 4.7678 i 0.0147 � 0.8497 � 0.0971 i 0.9468 � 0.2283 i 0.0912 0.3195 � 0.0000 i 1,342.441 1,342.441 i 0.1115 0.0000 1,345.229 '� i i i i i i i i • 2 i 2 i i 1 2024 •i 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.000Oe- 0.0221 6.3900e- 0.0285 5.8700e- 5.9700e- 0.0118 0.0000 i 44.6355 44.6355 7.8300e- 0.0000 44.8311 i i i i i 004 003 003 003 003 i 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 1,418.655 0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692 11 4 4 5 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Year tons/yr MT/yr 2021 •i 0.1704 i 1.8234 � 1.1577 i 2.3800e- 0.4141 � 0.0817 i 0.4958 0.1788 i 0.0754 0.2542 0.0000 i 210.7651 210.7651 i 0.0600 0.0000 212.2658 003 2022 •i 0.5865 4.0240 5.1546 0.0155 0.9509 0.1175 1.0683 0.2518 0.1103 0.3621 0.0000 i 1,418.655 1,418.655 0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692 i i i i i 0 2023 •i 0.5190 i 3.2850 4.7678 i 0.0147 0.8497 0.0971 i 0.9468 0.2283 i 0.0912 0.3195 0.0000 i 1,342.440 1,342.440 i 0.1115 0.0000 1,345.228 9 i 9 i i 7 2024 •i 4.1592 0.1313 0.2557 5.000Oe- 0.0221 6.3900e- 0.0285 5.8700e- 5.9700e- 0.0118 0.0000 i 44.6354 44.6354 7.8300e- 0.0000 44.8311 i i i i i 004 003 003 003 003 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 1,418.655 0.1215 0.0000 1,421.692 11 0 0 1 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 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 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 i 10.3804 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 i i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 i 220.9670 i 0.0201 i 3.7400e- 222.5835 Energy •i 0.1398 i 1.2312 i 0.7770 7.6200e- i i 0.0966 i 0.0966 i i 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1 3,896.073 i 3,896.073 i 0.1303 i 0.0468 3,913.283 003 i i i i i 2 i 2 i i 3 ;� i i i i Mobile •1 1.5857 i 7.9962 i 19.1834 i 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 i 7.8559 i 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 1 7,620.498 7,620.498 i 0.3407 0.0000 1 7,629.016 '1 i i i i i i i i 1 6 i 6 i i 1 2 Waste •1 i i i � � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 i 0.0000 207.8079 i 12.2811 0.0000 1 514.8354 ------------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- -------------- ----------------------*------r------ ---------------j-------*------- Water •1 i i i � � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 � 29.1632 i 556.6420 � 585.8052 i 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 12,531.15 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47 j j j j 07 19 j 51 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Area •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 10.3804 i 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 � i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 � 220.9670 i 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 i Energy •i 0.1398 i 1.2312 0.7770 i 7.6200e- 0.0966 i 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 i 3,896.073 3,896.073 i 0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283 003 i i i i i 2 i 2 i i i 3 Mobile •i 1.5857 i 7.9962 19.1834 i 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 i 7.8559 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 i 7,620.498 7,620.498 i 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016 6 i 6 i i i 2 Waste •1 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 i 0.0000 207.8079 i 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 Water •1 i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 • 29.1632 i 556.6420 585.8052 i 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 12,531.15 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47 07 19 51 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM 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 19/1/2021 110/12/2021 5: 30: + i 2 :Site Preparation +Site Preparation 110/13/2021 :11/9/2021 5: 20: + i 3 •Grading +Grading 111/10/2021 :1/11/2022 5: 45: + i 4 -Building Construction +Building Construction 11/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: + i 5 -Paving +Paving 112/13/2023 :1/30/2024 5: 35: + i 6 -Architectural Coating -Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5. 35, Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00" , 0.001 458.00; 10.00: 6.90; 20.00:LD_Mix 1HDT_Mix (HHDT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • Site Preparation - - - - - - - - - - - - - �_ 7; ________ __'------ -- 18.00: I - - 0.001 - - - - - - i 0.00: - - - - - - - - - ' - - 10.00: - - - - - - - - - - 6.90; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20.00;LD_Mix - - - - - - - - - ;HDT_Mix - T - - - - - - - - - ;HHDT --------------- ° �- Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 10.00: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 10.00: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 10.00: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f ; Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 10.00, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i , , , , 0.0496 , 0.0000 , 0.0496 , 7.5100e- , 0.0000 ; 7.5100e- 0.0000 i 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 , 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0475 , 0.4716 , 0.3235 , 5.8000e- , , 0.0233 , 0.0233 , , 0.0216 ; 0.0216 0.0000 i 51.0012 , 51.0012 , 0.0144 , 0.0000 i 51.3601 004 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e- 0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601 004 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I PM2.5 I PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 1.9300e- i 0.0634 i 0.0148 1.8000e- i 3.9400e- 1.9000e- 4.1300e- i 1.0800e- 1.8000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 i 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e- i 0.0000 i 17.4869 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 7.2000e- 5.3000e- 6.0900e- 2.000Oe- 1.6800e- 1.000Oe- 1.6900e- 4.5000e- 1.000Oe- 4.6000e- 0.0000 i 1.5281 1.5281 5.000Oe- 0.0000 i 1.5293 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 2.6500e- 0.0639 0.0209 2.000Oe- 5.6200e- 2.000Oe- 5.8200e- 1.5300e- 1.9000e- 1.7200e- 0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e- 0.0000 19.0161 11 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 i 7.5100e- 0.0000 7.5100e- 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 003 003 Off -Road •i 0.0475 i 0.4716 i 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 i 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 i 0.0000 i 51.3600 004 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e- 0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e- 0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600 004 003 1 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I PM2.5 I PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Hauling •I 1.9300e- I 0.0634 I 0.0148 11.8000e- 13.9400e- I 1.9000e- 14.1300e- I 1.0800e- 11.8000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 I 17.4566 I 17.4566 11.2100e- I 0.0000 i 17.4869 �I 003 I I I 004 I 003 I 004 I 003 I 003 I 004 003003 I I- I I I I I I I I I I I Vendor •I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I I I I I I I I- I I I Worker •I 7.2000e- 1.6800e- 1.00OOe- 4.6000e- � 0.0000 I 1.5281 1.5281 0.0000 i 1.5293 15.3000e- 16.0900e- 12.00OOe- I I 11.6900e- 14.5000e- 11.00OOe- I 15.00OOe- I 'I 004 I 004 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 004 I 005 004 005 � Total 2.6500e- 0.0639 0.0209 2.00OOe- 5.6200e- 2.00OOe- 5.8200e- 1.5300e- 1.9000e- 1.7200e- 0.0000 18.9847 18.9847 1.2600e- 0.0000 19.0161 11 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Fugitive Dust •I I I I I 0.1807 I 0.0000 I 0.1807 I 0.0993 I 0.0000 0.0993 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I I I I I I 1 I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I I Off -Road •I 0.0389 I 0.4050 I 0.2115 13.8000e- I I 0.0204 I 0.0204 I I 0.0188 � 0.0188 � 0.0000 I 33.4357 I 33.4357 I 0.0108 I 0.0000 i 33.7061 004 I I I I 1 I I I I Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e- 0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Hauling •I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I • I- I I I I I I I I I I I Vendor •I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I • Worker •I 5.8000e- 1.3400e- 1.000Oe- 3.7000e- 0.0000 I 1.2225 1.2225 0.0000 i 1.2234 14.3000e- 14.8700e- 11.000Oe- I I 11.3500e- 13.6000e- 11.000Oe- I 14.000Oe- I 'I 'I 004 I 004 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 005 I 003 I 004 I 005 004 I 005 � I I I I I I I 1 • Total 5.8000e- 4.3000e- 4.8700e- 1.000Oe- 1.3400e- 1.000Oe- 1.3500e- 3.6000e- 1.000Oe- 3.7000e- 0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.0007 0.0000 1.2234 11 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr I I I I I I I I I I I Fugitive Dust •I I I I I 0.1807 I 0.0000 I 0.1807 I 0.0993 I 0.0000 0.0993 � 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 ;� I I I I I I I 1 • � I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I I Off -Road •I 0.0389 I 0.4050 I 0.2115 13.8000e- I I 0.0204 I 0.0204 I I 0.0188 � 0.0188 � 0.0000 I 33.4357 I 33.4357 I 0.0108 I 0.0000 i 33.7060 004 I I I I 1 • I I I I Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e- 0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 - ------------------------------------------'------------------ - - -- -- - -+-------------'--------------- ------- Worker •i 5.8000e- 4.3000e- 4.8700e- 1.00OOe- 1.3400e- 1.00OOe- 1.3500e- 3.6000e- 1.00OOe- 3.7000e- 0.0000 i 1.2225 1.2225 4.00OOe- 0.0000 i 1.2234 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 5.8000e- 4.3000e- 4.8700e- 1.00OOe- 1.3400e- 1.00OOe- 1.3500e- 3.6000e- 1.00OOe- 3.7000e- 0.0000 1.2225 1.2225 4.00OOe- 0.0000 1.2234 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 i 0.0693 i 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0796 i 0.8816 i 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 i 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 i 0.0000 i 104.3776 003 Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 ------------------------------------------'------------------------ --+-------------'---------------------- Worker •i 1.2200e- 9.000Oe- 0.0103 3.000Oe- 2.8300e- 2.000Oe- 2.8600e- 7.5000e- 2.000Oe- 7.8000e- 0.0000 i 2.5808 2.5808 8.000Oe- 0.0000 i 2.5828 i i i i i 003 004 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 1.2200e- 9.000Oe- 0.0103 3.000Oe- 2.8300e- 2.000Oe- 2.8600e- 7.5000e- 2.000Oe- 7.8000e- 0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.0007 0.0000 2.5828 11 003 004 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •i i i i i 0.1741 i 0.0000 i 0.1741 i 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0796 i 0.8816 i 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 i 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 i 0.0000 i 104.3775 003 i i i i i • i i i i Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e- 0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 1.2200e- 9.000Oe- 0.0103 3.000Oe- 2.8300e- 2.000Oe- 2.8600e- 7.5000e- 2.000Oe- 7.8000e- 0.0000 i 2.5808 2.5808 8.000Oe- 0.0000 i 2.5828 i i i i i 003 004 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 1.2200e- 9.000Oe- 0.0103 3.000Oe- 2.8300e- 2.000Oe- 2.8600e- 7.5000e- 2.000Oe- 7.8000e- 0.0000 2.5808 2.5808 8.000Oe- 0.0000 2.5828 7-t-I 003 004 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 0.0807 i 0.0000 i 0.0807 0.0180 i 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 5.7200e- 5.7200e- 5.2600e- 5.2600e- 0.0000 i 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 i 19.2414 i i i 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 0.0807 5.7200e- 0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e- 0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 19.2414 004 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 2.1000e- i 1.5000e- i 1.7400e- 1.000Oe- i 5.2000e- 0.0000 5.3000e- i 1.4000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 0.0000 i 0.4587 0.4587 1.000Oe- i 0.0000 i 0.4590 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005 Total 2.1000e- 1.5000e- 1.7400e- 1.0000e- 5.2000e- 0.0000 5.3000e- 1.4000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.000Oe- 0.0000 0.4590 11 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 0.0807 i 0.0000 i 0.0807 0.0180 i 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 5.7200e- 5.7200e- 5.2600e- 5.2600e- 0.0000 i 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 i 19.2414 i i i 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e- 0.0807 5.7200e- 0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e- 0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e- 0.0000 19.2414 004 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 2.1000e- i 1.5000e- i 1.7400e- 1.00OOe- i 5.2000e- 0.0000 5.3000e- i 1.4000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 0.0000 i 0.4587 0.4587 1.00OOe- i 0.0000 i 0.4590 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005 Total 2.1000e- 1.5000e- 1.7400e- 1.00OOe- 5.2000e- 0.0000 5.3000e- 1.4000e- 0.0000 1.4000e- 0.0000 0.4587 0.4587 1.00OOe- 0.0000 0.4590 11 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.2158 i 1.9754 2.0700 i 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 i i 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 i 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 i 0.0000 i 294.8881 003 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 ---------------- Vendor •i 0.0527 i 1.6961 i 0.4580 4.5500e- i 0.1140 3.1800e- 0.1171 i 0.0329 3.0400e- 0.0359 0.0000 i 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 i 0.0000 i 442.6435 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.3051 i 0.2164 i 2.5233 7.3500e- i 0.7557 6.2300e- 0.7619 i 0.2007 5.7400e- 0.2065 0.0000 i 663.9936 663.9936 0.0187 i 0.0000 i 664.4604 003 003 003 i Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e- 0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e- 0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977 1,105.977 0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103 003 003 1 1 9 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.2158 i 1.9754 i 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 i 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 i 0.0000 i 294.8877 003 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e- 0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 ---------------- Vendor •i 0.0527 i 1.6961 i 0.4580 4.5500e- i 0.1140 3.1800e- 0.1171 i 0.0329 3.0400e- 0.0359 0.0000 i 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 i 0.0000 i 442.6435 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.3051 i 0.2164 i 2.5233 7.3500e- i 0.7557 6.2300e- 0.7619 i 0.2007 5.7400e- 0.2065 0.0000 i 663.9936 663.9936 0.0187 i 0.0000 i 664.4604 003 003 003 i Total 0.3578 1.9125 2.9812 0.0119 0.8696 9.4100e- 0.8790 0.2336 8.7800e- 0.2424 0.0000 1,105.977 1,105.977 0.0451 0.0000 1,107.103 003 003 1 1 9 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 0.1942 i 1.7765 i 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 i 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 i 0.0000 i 287.9814 003j Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814 003 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0382 i 1.2511 i 0.4011 4.3000e- i 0.1113 1.4600e- 0.1127 i 0.0321 1.4000e- 0.0335 0.0000 i 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 i 0.0000 i 418.5624 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.2795 i 0.1910 i 2.2635 6.9100e- i 0.7377 5.9100e- 0.7436 i 0.1960 5.4500e- 0.2014 0.0000 i 624.5363 624.5363 0.0164 i 0.0000 i 624.9466 003 003 003 i Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e- 0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e- 0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529 1,042.529 0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509 003 003 4 4 0 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road 0.1942 i 1.7765 i 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 i 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 i 0.0000 i 287.9811 i i i i i • i i i i 003j Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e- 0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811 003 j CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0382 i 1.2511 i 0.4011 4.3000e- i 0.1113 1.4600e- 0.1127 i 0.0321 1.4000e- 0.0335 0.0000 i 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 i 0.0000 i 418.5624 003 003 003 i Worker •i 0.2795 i 0.1910 i 2.2635 6.9100e- i 0.7377 5.9100e- 0.7436 i 0.1960 5.4500e- 0.2014 0.0000 i 624.5363 624.5363 0.0164 i 0.0000 i 624.9466 003 003 003 i Total 0.3177 1.4420 2.6646 0.0112 0.8490 7.3700e- 0.8564 0.2281 6.8500e- 0.2349 0.0000 1,042.529 1,042.529 0.0392 0.0000 1,043.509 003 003 4 4 0 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 i 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 i 13.1227 i i i •� 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 1 m CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 ��----------------------- ---------------------'----------------------- -+ - -------------'--.--�-------T Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 '� I '� • I • Worker •i 2.8000e- 1.9000e- 2.2300e- 1.000Oe- 7.3000e- 1.000Oe- 7.3000e- 1.9000e- 1.000Oe- 2.000Oe- 0.0000 i 0.6156 0.6156 2.000Oe- 0.0000 i 0.6160 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Total 2.8000e- 1.9000e- 2.2300e- 1.000Oe- 7.3000e- 1.000Oe- 7.3000e- 1.9000e- 1.000Oe- 2.000Oe- 0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.6160 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 i 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 i 13.1227 i i i •� 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 6.7100e- 0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e- 3.3200e- 3.3200e- 3.0500e- 3.0500e- 0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e- 0.0000 13.1227 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 1 1 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 I I Worker •i 2.8000e- 1.9000e- 2.2300e- 1.00OOe- 7.3000e- 1.00OOe- 7.3000e- 1.9000e- 1.00OOe- 2.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.6156 0.6156 2.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.6160 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 Total 2.8000e- 1.9000e- 2.2300e- 1.00OOe- 7.3000e- 1.00OOe- 7.3000e- 1.9000e- 1.00OOe- 2.00OOe- 0.0000 0.6156 0.6156 2.00OOe- 0.0000 0.6160 004 004 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.0109 i 0.1048 0.1609 i 2.5000e- i i 5.1500e- i 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 i 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- i 0.0000 i 22.2073 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •1 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 22.2073 11 004 003 003 003 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 4.4000e- 2.9000e- 3.5100e- 1.000Oe- 1.2300e- 1.000Oe- 1.2400e- 3.3000e- 1.000Oe- 3.4000e- 0.0000 i 1.0094 1.0094 3.000Oe- 0.0000 i 1.0100 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 4.4000e- 2.9000e- 3.5100e- 1.0000e- 1.2300e- 1.000Oe- 1.2400e- 3.3000e- 1.000Oe- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.000Oe- 0.0000 1.0100 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 I PM10 Total I I PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Category tons/yr MT/yr Off -Road •i 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 i 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 i 22.2073 i i i •� 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i Paving •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e- 5.1500e- 5.1500e- 4.7400e- 4.7400e- 0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e- 0.0000 11 004 003 003 003 003 003 m CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 4.4000e- 2.9000e- 3.5100e- 1.00OOe- 1.2300e- 1.00OOe- 1.2400e- 3.3000e- 1.00OOe- 3.4000e- 0.0000 i 1.0094 1.0094 3.00OOe- 0.0000 i 1.0100 i i i i i 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 Total 4.4000e- 2.9000e- 3.5100e- 1.00OOe- 1.2300e- 1.00OOe- 1.2400e- 3.3000e- 1.00OOe-F74000e- 0.0000 1.0094 1.0094 3.00OOe- 0.0000 1.0100 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •1 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1600e- 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 i 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 i 4.4745 i i i 003 005 003 003 003 003 . 004 i Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.00OOe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 4.4745 005 003 003 003 003 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 7.4800e- 4.9300e- 0.0596 1.9000e- 0.0209 1.6000e- 0.0211 5.5500e- 1.5000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 i 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e- 0.0000 i 17.1394 i i i i i 003 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 i Total 7.4800e- 4.9300e- 0.0596 1.9000e- 0.0209 1.6000e- 0.0211 5.5500e- 1.5000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e- 0.0000 17.1394 11 003 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating •1 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1600e- 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 i 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 i 4.4745 i i i 003 005 003 003 003 003 . 004 i Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.000Oe- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 1.0700e- 0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e- 0.0000 4.4745 005 003 003 003 003 004 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 Worker •i 7.4800e- 4.9300e- 0.0596 1.9000e- 0.0209 1.6000e- 0.0211 5.5500e- 1.5000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 i 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e- 0.0000 i 17.1394 i i i i i 003 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 i Total 7.4800e- 4.9300e- 0.0596 1.9000e- 0.0209 1.6000e- 0.0211 5.5500e- 1.5000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 17.1287 17.1287 4.3000e- 0.0000 17.1394 11 003 003 004 004 003 004 003 004 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 1.5857 i 7.9962 i 19.1834 i 0.0821 i 7.7979 i 0.0580 7.8559 i 2.0895 i 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 i 7,620.498 � 7,620.498 � 0.3407 i 0.0000 i 7,629.016 6 i 6 i i i 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 • 7,620.498 • 0.3407 - 0.0000 • 7,629.016 6 6 2 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity •1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 0.0000 1 I 1 0.0000 1 I I 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 I I 12,512.646 1 2,512.646 I 0.1037 I 1 0.0215 i 2,521.635 Mitigated 5 1 5 1 1 1 6 •1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 Electricity •1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 0.0000 1 I 1 0.0000 I I I 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 1 I 12,512.646 1 2,512.646 I 0.1037 I 1 0.0215 2,521.635 Unmitigated 5 1 5 1 I 1 6 •1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 NaturalGas 0.1398I 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 I 0.0254 1 1,391.647 Miti 1 I 003 7 7 8gated I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 NaturalGas 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- - 0.0966 0.0966 - 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 • 1,383.426 • 0.0265 - 0.0254 • 1,391.647 Unmitigated 003 7 7 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 I PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Apartments Low I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 i 408494 42.2000e- 1 0.0188 1 8.0100e- 1 1.2000e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1 1.5200e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1.5200e- � 0.0000 1 21.7988 1 21.7988 1 4.2000e- 1 4.000Oe- i 21.9284 Rise 1 '1 003 1 1 003 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 004 1 004 1 ; 1 1 r------�I------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � - 1 1 1 1 T Apartments Mid i 1.30613e .1 0.0704 1 0.6018 1 0.2561 1 3.8400e- 1 1 0.0487 1 0.0487 1 1 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 1 696.9989 1 696.9989 1 0.0134 1 0.0128 i 701.1408 Rise +007 ; 1 I I 003 _ 1 ; 1 r------71------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � - 1 1 1 1 T General Office Building i 468450 .1 2.5300e- 1 0.0230 1 0.0193 1 1.4000e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1 1.7500e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1.7500e- 0.0000 1 24.9983 1 24.9983 1 4.8000e- 1 4.6000e- i 25.1468 1 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 -----------1 '1-----------------------------------------------------------------------• 1------------------------1 High Turnover (Sit 8.30736e •1 0.0448 1 0.4072 1 0.3421 1 2.4400e- 1 1 0.0310 1 0.0310 1 1 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 1 443.3124 1 443.3124 1 8.5000e- 1 8.1300e- i 445.9468 Down Restaurant) 1 +006 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 ----------- Hotel ------ �'1------------------------------------------�-------�---------------� 1 �-------�-------�-------1 r71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �____--'I-------1 1 1 T____'-_ 1.74095e 9.3900e- 0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 0.0000 1 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e- 1.7000e- 93.4557 1 .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 __ " '-" "I Quality 1 j-------i-------i-------i-------i--------------- i------- i---------------. 1 �-------�-------�-------' r------71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �____--'I-------1 1 1 T____'-_ 1 1.84608e •1 9.9500e- 0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e- 1.8100e- 1 99.0993 Restaurant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 __t------71-------1 1 , I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 - 1 I I I T_____-_ Regional Shopping Centers i 91840 .1 5.000Oe- 1 4.5000e- 1 3.7800e- 1 3.000Oe- 1 1 3.4000e- 1 3.4000e- 1 1 3.4000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1 4.9009 1 4.9009 1 9.000Oe- 1 9.000Oe- i 4.9301 004 1 003 1 003 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 . 1 1 005 1 005 1 Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647 003 8 8 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use I I PM10 I PM10 Total PM2.5 I PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 i 408494 42.2000e- 1 0.0188 1 8.0100e- 1 1.2000e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1 1.5200e- 1 1 1.5200e- 1.5200e- � 0.0000 1 21.7988 1 21.7988 1 4.2000e- 1 4.000Oe- i 21.9284 Rise 1 '1 003 1 1 003 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 004 1 004 1 1 ; 1 r------�I------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , - 1 1 1 1 T Apartments Mid i 1.30613e .1 0.0704 1 0.6018 1 0.2561 1 3.8400e- 1 1 0.0487 1 0.0487 1 1 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 1 696.9989 1 696.9989 1 0.0134 1 0.0128 i 701.1408 Rise +007 ; 1 I I 003 _ 1 ; 1 r------71------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , - 1 1 1 1 T General Office Building i 468450 .1 2.5300e- 1 0.0230 1 0.0193 1 1.4000e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1 1.7500e- 1 1 1.7500e- 1.7500e- 0.0000 1 24.9983 1 24.9983 1 4.8000e- 1 4.6000e- i 25.1468 1 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 -----------1 '1-----------------------------------------------------------------------• 1------------------------1 High Turnover (Sit 8.30736e .1 0.0448 1 0.4072 1 0.3421 1 2.4400e- 1 1 0.0310 1 0.0310 1 1 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 1 443.3124 1 443.3124 1 8.5000e- 1 8.1300e- i 445.9468 Down Restaurant) 1 +006 i 1 1 1 003 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 ----------- Hotel ------ �'1------------------------------------------�-------�---------------� 1 �-------�------- -------1 r71-------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , �____--'I-------1 1 1 ------- 1.74095e •1 9.3900e- 0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 6.4900e- 0.0000 1 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e- 1.7000e- 93.4557 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -""'-""i Quality '1 j-------i-------i-------i-------i--------------- i------- i---------------��1 �-------�-------�-------1 r-------------1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , ____--'I-------1 1 1 T_----- 71 1.84608e •1 9.9500e- 0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 6.8800e- 0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e- 1.8100e- 99.0993 Restaurant 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +006 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 __t------71-------1 1 , I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 - 1 I I I T_____-_ Regional Shopping Centers i 91840 •1 5.000Oe- 1 4.5000e- 1 3.7800e- 1 3.000Oe- 1 1 3.4000e- 1 3.4000e- 1 1 3.4000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1 4.9009 1 4.9009 1 9.000Oe- 1 9.000Oe- i 4.9301 ; 004 1 003 1 003 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 . 1 1 005 1 005 1 Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e- 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426 1,383.426 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647 003 8 8 j j 8 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Use Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 106010 •i 33.7770 i 1.3900e- 2.9000e- 33.8978 Rise 003 004 i --�------it------ Apartments Mid •---------------- *------- 3.94697e •i 1,257.587 i 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086 Rise +006 9 i i i 9 General Office -j--------j------- i 584550 •i 186.2502 i 7.6900e- 1.5900e- 186.9165 Building 003 003 High Turnover (Sit -j- - - - - --- - - - - - - 1.58904e •1 506.3022 i 0.0209 4.3200e- 508.1135 Down Restaurant) i +006 003 -- Hotel -----•--------------- -ii------- i 550308 •1 175.3399 i 7.2400e- 1.5000e- 175.9672 003 003 - Quality •�- - - - - --- - - - - -- ------ii------- 353120 •1 112.5116 i 4.6500e- 9.6000e- 112.9141 Restaurant ;1 i 003 i 004 Regional 756000 •i 240.8778 i 9.9400e- 2.0600e- T 241.7395 Shopping Center 003 i 003 Total 2,512.646 0.1037 0.0215 2:521.635 5 6 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 35 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Mitigated Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Use Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Low 106010 •i 33.7770 i 1.3900e- 2.9000e- 33.8978 Rise 003 004 i Apartments Mid • ---------------- 3.94697e •i 1,257.587 i 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086 Rise +006 9 i i i 9 General Office -j--------j------- i 584550 •i 186.2502 i 7.6900e- 1.5900e- 186.9165 Building 003 003 High Turnover (Sit -j- - - - - --- - - - - - - 1.58904e •1 506.3022 i 0.0209 4.3200e- 508.1135 Down Restaurant) i +006 003 ---r--- Hotel ------- *------- ---ii•--------------- i 550308 •1 175.3399 i 7.2400e- 1.5000e- 175.9672 003 003 --- Quality •�- - - - - --- r------ii------- *------- 353120 •1 112.5116 i 4.6500e- 9.6000e- 112.9141 Restaurant ;1 003 i 004 Regional -------------- 756000 •i 240.8778 i 9.9400e- 2.0600e- 241.7395 Shopping Center 003 i 003 Total 2,512.646�71037 0.0215 2,521.635 5 6 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 36 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated •i 5.1437 i 0.2950 � 10.3804 1.6700e- 0.0714 i 0.0714 i i 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 i 220.9670 � 220.9670 i 0.0201 � 3.7400e- 1 222.5835 003 003 Unmitigated 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e- - 0.0714 - 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 - 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.4137 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Coating % ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------*------- Consumer �� 4.3998 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 0.0206 i 0.1763 0.0750 i 1.1200e- i 0.0143 i 0.0143 i 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 i 204.1166 204.1166 i 3.9100e- 3.7400e- i 205.3295 •� 003 003 003 i . Landscaping •i 0.3096 i 0.1187 10.3054 i 5.4000e- i 0.0572 i 0.0572 i 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 i 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 i 17.2540 i 004 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e- 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 003 003 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 37 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural •i 0.4137 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 4.3998 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 0.0206 i 0.1763 0.0750 i 1.1200e- 0.0143 i 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 i 204.1166 204.1166 i 3.9100e- 3.7400e- 205.3295 003 003 003 i Landscaping •i 0.3096 i 0.1187 10.3054 i 5.4000e- i 0.0572 i 0.0572 i 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 i 16.8504 16.8504 i 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540 004 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e- 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 222.5835 11 003 003 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 38 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated •1 585.8052 i 3.0183 i 0.0755 i 683.7567 - - - - - - - - - - - % --------------4------------------------------- - - - - - - - Unmitigated •• 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 39 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e door Use Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Low i 1.62885 / •1 10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e- 12.6471 Rise i 1.02688 003 i•i ------- ------- 1 11 Apartments Mid 63.5252 / •i 425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363 Rise i 40.0485 i General Office 7.99802 / ■i 53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e- 11 61.6019 Building i 4.90201 ;i 003 i•i ------- ------- High Turnover (Sit 10.9272 / ■i 51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e- 1 62.8482 Down Restaurant) i 0.697482 003 i ___r ------- .�____-__ T_______ Hotel 1.26834 / •i 6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e- 7.5079 i 0.140927 ;: 003 ----------- r------- .T�____-__ T_______ Quality 2.42827 / •i 11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e- 13.9663 Restaurant i 0.154996 003 i ___________ ------- T_______ Regional 4.14806 / •i 27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e- 31.9490 Shopping Center i 2.54236 003 Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 40 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e door Use Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Low 1.62885 / •1 10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e- 12.6471 Rise 1.02688 ;i i 003 '-------- -------- ------- Apartments Mid 1 63.5252 / •1 425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363 Rise 40.0485 ; -- - - - --- - - - - - - General Office 1 7.99802 / •i 53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e- i 61.6019 Building 4.90201 ;i 003 --r- ----- ------- -j--------------- * - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit 10.9272 / •i 51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e- 62.8482 Down Restaurant) i 0.697482 ;i i 003 ' -------- ------- Hotel i 1.26834 / •1 6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e- i 7.5079 0.140927 'i 003 -- - - - - --- - - - - - - Quality 2.42827 / •i 11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e- 13.9663 Restaurant i 0.154996 ;i i 003 ---------- --------------- Regional 4.14806 / •i 27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e- 31.9490 Shopping Center 2.54236 ;i i 003 Total 585.8052 j 3.0183 j 0.0755 683.7567 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 41 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual CategoryNear Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e MT/yr Mitigated •i 207.8079 i 12.2811 i 0.0000 1 514.8354 - - - - - - - - - - - % --------------+------------------------------ - - - - - - - Unmitigated •• 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 42 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Disposed Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Low 11.5 •1 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834 Rise •� i • '-------'------- Apartments Mid i 448.5 •i 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 i 225.5513 Rise •� -------- i -------- ------- '------- GeneralOffice i 41.85 •1 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 i 21.0464 Building i •� - ------ �i------- '------- '------- *------- High Turnover (Sit 428.4 •1 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430 Down Restaurant)1 •� • '-------'------- Hotel i 27.38 •1 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 i 13.7694 __ i i Quality 7.3 •i 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712 Restaurant i •� • -------- ------- 58.8 •i 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706 Shopping Center i •� Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 43 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Mitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Disposed Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Low 11.5 •1 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834 Rise •� i • '-------'------- Apartments Mid i 448.5 •i 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 i 225.5513 Rise •� -------- i -------- ------- '------- GeneralOffice i 41.85 •1 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 i 21.0464 Building i •� - ------ �i------- '------- '------- *------- High Turnover (Sit 428.4 •1 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430 Down Restaurant)1 •� '-------'------- Hotel i 27.38 •1 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 i 13.7694 __ i i Quality 7.3 •i 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712 Restaurant i •� • - ' - - - - - - -'- - - - - - - Regional 58.8 •i 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706 Shopping Center i •� Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 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 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 44 of 44 Date: 1/12/2021 2:26 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_ h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 High ----------------------- - - - - -- = - - ;------- - - - - --- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 + -----------------------------_------------------------------_- Hotel 50.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = - ---;-------------- - - - - - - Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 ------ - - - --y----------------_------------------------------_- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = --- ----;-------------- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 _ --- - - - - -p--------------------_------------------------------ A Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + ----------------------------- = --- ----;------------- - - - - - - Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 ---- - - - - ---------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------= Apartments artments Mid Rise 975.00 + ----- -------- --------- -i------------------+--------------- Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------_------------------------------_ ----------------------- - - - - -- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM 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 FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces -----r------------------------------ FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- NumberWood 1.25 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ ------------------------- NumberWood r 48.75 0.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------r----------------------------- -------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- ST_TR 158.37 79.82 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- ST_TR ---------------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0.0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 i 6,163.416 6,163.416 1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103 i i � i i i 2022 •i 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0.0000 i 12,493.44 12,493.44 1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57 i i i i i 03 03 07 2023 •i 4.1534 i 25.7658 38.7457 i 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 i 7.7679 1.8799 i 0.7136 2.5935 0.0000 i 12,150.48 12,150.48 i 0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46 2024 •1 237.0219 i 9.5478 14.9642 i 0.0239 1.2171 0.4694 i 1.2875 0.3229 i 0.4319 0.4621 0.0000 i 2,313.180 2,313.180 i 0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095 8 i 8 i i i 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 12,493.44 1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57 11 03 03 07 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2561 46.4415 31.4494 0.0636 18.2032 2.0456 20.2488 9.9670 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 i 6,163.416 6,163.416 1.9475 0.0000 6,212.103 i i � i i i 2022 •i 4.5441 38.8811 40.8776 0.1240 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0.0000 i 12,493.44 12,493.44 1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57 i i i i i 03 03 07 2023 •i 4.1534 i 25.7658 38.7457 i 0.1206 7.0088 0.7592 i 7.7679 1.8799 i 0.7136 2.5935 0.0000 i 12,150.48 12,150.48 i 0.9589 0.0000 12,174.46 2024 •1 237.0219 i 9.5478 14.9642 i 0.0239 1.2171 0.4694 i 1.2875 0.3229 i 0.4319 0.4621 0.0000 i 2,313.180 2,313.180 i 0.7166 0.0000 2,331.095 8 i 8 i i i 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 12,493.44 1.9485 0.0000 12,518.57 03 03 07 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 i i � � i � i i 50 50 i 92 --------------- Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 i 2 i i i 7 Mobile •1 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 i 46.2951 12.2950 i 0.3119 12.6070 i 50,306.60 50,306.60 i 2.1807 50,361.12 08 34 i 34 � � i Total 41.1168 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18 76,811.18 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87 11 762 16 16 86 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 88.4430 i 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 i 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 �� ■ 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 i 8,405.638 '� i i i i i i i i i i i ■ 2 2 i 7 Mobile 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 i 46.2951 12.2950 i 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 50,306.60 i 2.1807 i 50,361.12 i ■ 34 34 i 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 76,811.18 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87 16 16 86 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 110/12/2021 5 30: i i _ 2 Site Preparation +Site Preparation !10/13/2021 i11/9/2021 5 20: i i _ 3 •Grading +Grading !11/10/2021 i1/11/2022 5 45: i i _ 4 •Building Construction +Building Construction ! 1/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: i i _ 5 :Paving +Paving ! 12/13/2023 i 1/30/2024 5: 35: + I 1 1 6 -Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating -1/31/2024 -3/19/2024 5, 35- Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00 0.001 458.00; 10.00: 6.90; 20.00;LD_Mix IHDT_Mix EHHDT - - - - - - - - - - - - - Site Preparation 7; --------- I, 18.00: - - 0.001 - - - - - - i 0.00: - - - - - - - - - - - 10.00: - - - - - - - - - - 6.90; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20.00;LD_Mix --------------------- ;HDT_Mix ?HHDT �- --------------- ° Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 10.00: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 10.00: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 10.00: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f I Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 10.00, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust ;1 , , , , 3.3074 , 0.0000 , 3.3074 , 0.5008 , 0.0000 ; 0.5008 � i , 0.0000 , , i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 , 31.4407 , 21.5650 , 0.0388 , , 1.5513 , 1.5513 , , 1.4411 ; 1.4411 i 3,747.944 , 3,747.944 , 1.0549 , i 3,774.317 9 i 9 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3:774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241 1,292.241 0.0877 i 1,294.433 i i � i i � � i '� i i i i i i i i • 3 i 3 i i i 7 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0487 i 0.0313 i 0.4282 1.1800e- i 0.1141 9.5000e- 0.1151 i 0.0303 8.8000e- 0.0311 117.2799 117.2799 3.5200e- i i 117.3678 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.0912 1,411.801 f-77771,409.521 2 17,409.5211 2 1 5 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 i 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 i 31.4407 i 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 i 3,747.944 3,747.944 1.0549 i i 3,774.317 '� i i i i i i i i i i i • 9 9 i 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3,774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 i 1,292.241 1,292.241 0.0877 i 1,294.433 i i � i i • � � i '� i i i i i i i i • 3 i 3 i i i 7 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0487 i 0.0313 i 0.4282 1.1800e- i 0.1141 9.5000e- 0.1151 i 0.0303 8.8000e- 0.0311 117.2799 117.2799 3.5200e- i i 117.3678 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.1760 4.1265 1.3884 0.0131 0.3810 0.0135 0.3946 0.1034 0.0129 0.0912 1,411.801 f-7771,409.521 2 17,409.5211 2 1 5 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 i 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 � 0.0380 i � 2.0445 � 2.0445 i � 1.8809 � 1.8809 � i 3,685.656 � 3,685.656 � 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 '� i i i i i i i i i • g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0584 i 0.0375 i 0.5139 1.4100e- i 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 i 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e- i i 140.8414 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e- 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e- 140.8414 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 i 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 i 3,685.656 3,685.656 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 i g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0584 i 0.0375 i 0.5139 1.4100e- i 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 i 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 i 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e- i i 140.8414 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0584 0.0375 0.5139 1.4100e- 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 140.7359 140.7359 4.2200e- 140.8414 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 � 0.0620 i � 1.9853 � 1.9853 i � 1.8265 � 1.8265 � i 6,007.043 � 6,007.043 � 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 777 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0649 i 0.0417 i 0.5710 1.5700e- i 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 1 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e- i i 156.4904 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e- 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e- 156.4904 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •i 8.6733 0.0000 i 8.6733 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 i 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 '� i i i i i i i i i i i • 4 4 i 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 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0649 i 0.0417 i 0.5710 1.5700e- i 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e- i i 156.4904 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0649 0.0417 0.5710 1.5700e- 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 156.3732 156.3732 4.6900e- 156.4904 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 � 0.0621 i � 1.6349 � 1.6349 i � 1.5041 1.5041 � i 6,011.410 � 6,011.410 � 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i i i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0607 i 0.0376 i 0.5263 1.5100e- i 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e- i i 150.9813 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e- 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e- 150.9813 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 i 6,011.410 6,011.410 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0607 i 0.0376 i 0.5263 1.5100e- i 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e- i i 150.9813 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0607 0.0376 0.5263 1.5100e- 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 150.8754 150.8754 4.2400e- 150.9813 003 003 003 003 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 i 0.0269 0.8090 i 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.4079 i 13.2032 i 3.4341 0.0364 i 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 i 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 i 3,896.548 3,896.548 0.2236 i i 3,902.138 2 i 2 i i i 4 Worker •i 2.4299 i 1.5074 i 21.0801 0.0607 i 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 i 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 i 6,042.558 6,042.558 0.1697 i i 6,046.800 5 i 5 i i 1 0 Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 9,939.106 0.3933 9,948.938 [7779,939.106 7 7 4 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 i 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.4079 i 13.2032 i 3.4341 0.0364 i 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 i 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 i 3,896.548 3,896.548 0.2236 i i 3,902.138 2 i 2 i i i 4 Worker •i 2.4299 i 1.5074 i 21.0801 0.0607 i 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 i 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 i 6,042.558 6,042.558 0.1697 i i 6,046.800 5 i 5 i i 1 0 Total 2.8378 14.7106 24.5142 0.0971 7.0087 0.0741 7.0828 1.8799 0.0691 9,939.106 0.3933 9,948.938 [7779,939.106 7 7 4 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 � i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 i i i i i i i i 9 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.658T 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 j j j j j j 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3027 i 10.0181 i 3.1014 0.0352 i 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 i 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 i 3,773.876 3,773.876 0.1982 i i 3,778.830 2 i 2 i i i 0 Worker •i 2.2780 i 1.3628 i 19.4002 0.0584 i 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 i 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 i 5,821.402 5,821.402 0.1529 5,825.225 8 i 8 i i i 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 9,595.279 0.3511 9,604.055 0 0 4 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 9 i 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 11 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3027 i 10.0181 i 3.1014 0.0352 i 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 i 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 i 3,773.876 3,773.876 0.1982 i i 3,778.830 2 i 2 i i 1 0 Worker •i 2.2780 i 1.3628 i 19.4002 0.0584 i 6.0932 0.0479 6.1411 i 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 i 5,821.402 5,821.402 0.1529 i i 5,825.225 8 i 8 i i i 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 9,595.279 0.3511 9,604.055 0 0 4 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 '� i i i i i i i i 1 i 1 i i i 6 • Paving •i 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 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0427 i 0.0255 i 0.3633 1.0900e- i 0.1141 9.000Oe- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e- i i 109.0866 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e- 0.1141 9.000Oe- 0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e- 109.0866 003 004 004 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 i 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 1 i 1 i i i 6 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 11 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0427 i 0.0255 i 0.3633 1.0900e- i 0.1141 9.00OOe- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e- i i 109.0866 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0427 0.0255 0.3633 1.0900e- 0.1141 9.00OOe- 0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 109.0150 109.0150 2.8600e- 109.0866 003 004 004 003 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 14.6258 i 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 i i 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0403 i 0.0233 i 0.3384 1.0600e- i 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e- i i 105.6992 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e- 105.6992 003 004 004 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 i 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 i 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0403 i 0.0233 i 0.3384 1.0600e- i 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e- i i 105.6992 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0403 0.0233 0.3384 1.0600e- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 105.6336 105.6336 2.6300e- 105.6992 003 004 004 003 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •i 236.4115 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 i 2.9700e- i i 0.0609 i 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 i 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.4296 i 0.2481 i 3.6098 0.0113 i 1.2171 � 9.4300e- 1.2266 i 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,126.758 1,126.758 0.0280 i i 1,127.458 003 003 3 3 i 3 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e- 1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,126.758 1,126.758 0.0280 1,127.458 =.t.l 003 003 3 3 3 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •1 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 i 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.4296 i 0.2481 i 3.6098 0.0113 i 1.2171 � 9.4300e- 1.2266 i 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,126.758 1,126.758 0.0280 i i 1,127.458 003 003 3 3 i 3 0.4296 0.2481 3.6098 0.0113 1.2171 9.4300e- 1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,126.758 1,126.758 0.0280 1,127.458 =.t.' 003 003 3 3 3 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 9.8489 i 45.4304 114.8495 i 0.4917 i 45.9592 i 0.3360 46.2951 i 12.2950 � 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 50,306.60 2.1807 i i 50,361.12 •� . 34 34 i 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 • 50,306.60 • 2.1807 - 50,361.12 34 34 08 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 i 4.2573 0.0418 i i 0.5292 0.5292 i i 0.5292 0.5292 + i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 i 0.1532 1 8,405.638 Mitigated ;i . i 2 2 i 7 NaturalGas 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 • 8,355.983 • 0.1602 0.1532 • 8,405.638 Unmitigated 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1119.16 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid 35784.3 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1------------------------------------------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------ � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1283.42 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22759.9 •1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r-------1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4769.72 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 1 1 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 Quality 1 5057.75 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � v 1 1 1 1 T""--- 251.616 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1.11916 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid i 35.7843 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1 1------- ----------------------------- -------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------71_----__ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1.28342 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22.7599 .1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r------�1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4.76972 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 I I 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 -r------71 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 ------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �-------I-------1 1 1 T'------ Quality 5.05775 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T""--- 0.251616 •1 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 077 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 � 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 i i 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 50 50 92 -------------i i Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 • 18,148.59 - 0.4874 • 0.3300 • 18,259.11 50 50 92 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating•' ' i %i- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------*------- Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products •' . ' i Hearth •i 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 18,000.00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96 i i i i i i i Landscaping •i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 i 152.1542 003 i i i i i i i i i • Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 50 50 92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 1.6500 i 14.1000 6.0000 i 0.0900 1.1400 i 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 i 18,000.00 18,000.00 i 0.3450 1 0.3300 1 18,106.96 ---- -- - - - ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - --- - -- ------------------------------ Landscaping i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 152.1542 003 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 j j F-777000 50 50 j 92 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 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 Page 35 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:29 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer Fire Pumos and Emeraencv Generators IEquipment Type I Number I Hours/Day I Hours/Year I Horse Power I Load Factor I Fuel Type I Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 + 1000sgft ; 1.03 45,000.00 i 0 ----------------------------_------------------------------_ h Turnover Sit Down Restaurant)36.00 High ----------------------- - - - - -- = - - ;------- - - - - --- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.83 36,000.00 -+ 0 + -----------------------------_------------------------------_- Hotel 50.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = - ---;-------------- - - - - - - Room ; 1.67 72,600.00 - 1 0 ------ - - - --y----------------_------------------------------_- Qualit Restaurant 8.00 + ---------------------- - - - - -- = --- ----;-------------- - - - - -- 1000sgft ; 0.18 8,000.00 -+ 0 _ --- - - - - -p--------------------_------------------------------ A Apartments Low Rise 25.00 + ----------------------------- = --- ----;------------- - - - - - - Dwelling Unit ; 1.56 25,000.00 -+ 72 ---- - - - - ---------------------_------------------------------_------------------------------= Apartments artments Mid Rise 975.00 + ----- -------- --------- -i------------------+--------------- Dwelling Unit ; 25.66 975,000.00 i 2789 ------------------------------_------------------------------_ ----------------------- - - - - -- --------------}------------------E------------- Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sgft 1.29 56,000.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2028 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2Intensity 702.44 CH4Intensity 0.029 N20Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 2 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM 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 FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces -----r------------------------------ FireplaceWood Mass 1,019.20 0.00 ---------------------------- tblFireplaces ------------------------------ r-------------------------------------------------------- NumberWood 1.25 0.00 -------------p-------------_------------------- tblFire laces ------------ ------------------------- NumberWood r 48.75 0.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------r----------------------------- -------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tbITripsAndVMT ------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength r 14.70 10.00 ----------------------------_----------------- tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 7.16 6.17 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------r------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR 6.39 3.87 ----------------------------_-----------------------------' tblVehicleTrips --------------------------------------- ST_TR r 2.46 1.39 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips ------------------------------t------------------------------ -------------------------- ST_TR 158.37 79.82 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 3 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75 ----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips Y---------------------------- ST_TR �-----------------------------T-------------------------- } 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 Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves Wood stove DayYear } 25.00 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass i 999.60 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWood Mass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 4 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2621 i 46.4460 31.4068 i 0.0635 18.2032 � 2.0456 i 20.2488 9.9670 i 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 i 6,154.337 6,154.337 i 1.9472 � 0.0000 6,203.018 7 i 7 i i i 6 ------------- 2022 •i 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0.0000 i 12,035.34 12,035.34 1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60 i � i � � i � i � � i 40 40 i 13 2023 •i 4.3939 i 25.8648 37.5031 i 0.1162 � 7.0088 0.7598 i 7.7685 1.8799 i 0.7142 2.5940 0.0000 i 11,710.40 11,710.40 i 0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44 2024 •i 237.0656 i 9.5503 14.9372 i 0.0238 1.2171 � 0.4694 i 1.2875 0.3229 i 0.4319 0.4621 0.0000 i 2,307.051 2,307.051 i 0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962 '� i i i i i i i i • 7 i 7 i i i 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 12,035.34 1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60 11 40 40 13 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 5 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Year lb/day lb/day 2021 •i 4.2621 i 46.4460 31.4068 i 0.0635 18.2032 � 2.0456 i 20.2488 9.9670 i 1.8820 11.8490 0.0000 i 6,154.337 6,154.337 i 1.9472 � 0.0000 6,203.018 7 i 7 i i i 6 ------------- 2022 •i 4.7966 38.8851 39.6338 0.1195 8.8255 1.6361 10.4616 3.6369 1.5052 5.1421 0.0000 i 12,035.34 12,035.34 1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60 i � i � � i � i � � i 40 40 i 13 2023 •i 4.3939 i 25.8648 37.5031 i 0.1162 � 7.0088 0.7598 i 7.7685 1.8799 i 0.7142 2.5940 0.0000 i 11,710.40 11,710.40 i 0.9617 0.0000 11,734.44 2024 •i 237.0656 i 9.5503 14.9372 i 0.0238 1.2171 � 0.4694 i 1.2875 0.3229 i 0.4319 0.4621 0.0000 i 2,307.051 2,307.051 i 0.7164 0.0000 2,324.962 '� i i i i i i i i • 7 i 7 i i i 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 12,035.34 1.9482 0.0000 12,060.60 11 40 40 13 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-0O2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 6 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 i i � � i � i i 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 i 2 i i i 7 Mobile •i 9.5233 i 45.9914 � 110.0422 i 0.4681 � 45.9592 � 0.3373 i 46.2965 � 12.2950 i 0.3132 12.6083 i 47,917.80 � 47,917.80 i 2.1953 � � 47,972.68 '� 05 05 i 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 74,422.37 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44 87 87 17 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I I Category lb/day lb/day Area •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 88.4430 i 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 i 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 �� ■ 50 50 i 92 Energy •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 4.2573 i 0.0418 0.5292 i 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 0.1532 i 8,405.638 '� i i i i i i i i i i i ■ 2 2 i 7 Mobile 9.5233 i 45.9914 110.0422 i 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 i 46.2965 12.2950 i 0.3132 12.6083 � 47,917.80 47,917.80 i 2.1953 47,972.68 i ■ 05 05 i 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 74,422.37 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44 87 87 17 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 7 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 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 Reduction 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 110/12/2021 5 30: i i _ 2 Site Preparation +Site Preparation !10/13/2021 i11/9/2021 5 20: i i _ 3 •Grading +Grading !11/10/2021 i1/11/2022 5 45: i i _ 4 •Building Construction +Building Construction ! 1/12/2022 :12/12/2023 5: 500: i i _ 5 :Paving +Paving ! 12/13/2023 i 1/30/2024 5: 35: + I 1 1 6 -Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating -1/31/2024 -3/19/2024 5, 35- Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5 Acres of Paving: 0 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 — sgft) OffRoad Equipment CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 8 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Phase Name I Offroad Equipment Type I Amount I Usage Hours I Horse Power I Load Factor Demolition 'Concrete/Industrial Saws ; 1 ; 8.001 81 • 0.73 -------------------------- �- - -------------------------- ----------- Demolition +Excavators ; 3 8.001 158• 0.38 + _ i _ Demolition 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 21 8.001 247• 0.40 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Site Preparation 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 3 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Site Preparation +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 41 8.001 97• 0.37 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Excavators ; 2 8.001 158• 0.38 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Graders ; 1 8.001 187• 0.41 -------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading 'Rubber Tired Dozers ; 1 8.001 247• 0.40 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------i ------ - - - - --------------- ----------- Grading 'Scrapers ; 21 8.001 367• 0.48 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Grading +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 2 8.001 97• 0.37 ---------------------------- _ i -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Cranes ; 11 7.001 231, 0.29 �_ i - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction 'Forklifts ; 3 8.001 89• 0.20 + _ __ i i _ Building Construction 'Generator Sets ; 1 8.001 _ 84• 0.74 �_ _ i - - - - -------------------------- ----------- Building Construction +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3 7.001 _ 97• 0.37 + __ i i Building Construction 'Welders ; 1 8.001 46• 0.45 �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving +Pavers ; 2 8.001 130• 0.42 --------------------------- �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Paving Equipment ; 21 8.001 132• 0.36 i �- - - - -------------------------- ----------- Paving 'Rollers ; 2 8.001 80• 0.38 ---------------------------- --------------------------*-----------------F------------ r------------- ----------- Architectural Coating •Air Compressors 1 • 6.00• 78• 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 9 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Phase Name I Offroad Equipment I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Trip I Vendor Trip I Hauling Trip I Worker Vehicle I Vendor I Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class Demolition A 6; 15.00" , 0.001 458.00; 10.00: 6.90; 20.00:LD_Mix 1HDT_Mix (HHDT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • Site Preparation - - - - - - - - - - - - - �_ 7; ________ __'------ -- 18.00: I - - 0.001 - - - - - - i 0.00: - - - - - - - - - ' - - 10.00: - - - - - - - - - - 6.90; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20.00;LD_Mix - - - - - - - - - ;HDT_Mix - T - - - - - - - - - ;HHDT --------------- ° �- Grading -------------; 8; i------------ 20.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------�- 0.00: -------------------------- 10.00: 6.90; 20.00.LD_Mix ------' iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT ----------------° �- Building Construction v -------------=---------------''''-, 9; i----------i- 801.00- I --------i 143.001 ,- 0.00: ---------' --------- �- 10.00: ------------------------�----------' 6.90, 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -------- ;HHDT ° �- Paving -------------- 6; - i------------ 15.00: --------i 0.001 ,----------4- 0.00: ---------- 10.00: 6.90; -------------' 20.00;LD_Mix iHDT_Mix -- EHHDT i f I Architectural Coating ; 1; 160.00, 0.00, 0.00, 10.00, 6.90, 20.00,LD_Mix ;HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust ;1 , , , , 3.3074 , 0.0000 , 3.3074 , 0.5008 , 0.0000 ; 0.5008 � i , 0.0000 , , i 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1651 , 31.4407 , 21.5650 , 0.0388 , , 1.5513 , 1.5513 , , 1.4411 ; 1.4411 i 3,747.944 , 3,747.944 , 1.0549 , i 3,774.317 9 i 9 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3:774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 10 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855 1,269.855 0.0908 i 1,272.125 i i � i � i i '� i i i i i i i i • 5 i 5 i i i 2 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0532 i 0.0346 i 0.3963 1.1100e- i 0.1141 9.5000e- 0.1151 i 0.0303 8.8000e- 0.0311 i 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e- i 1 110.5539 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.1165 1,380.326 1,380.326 0.0941 1,382.679 2 2 1 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 i 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.1551 i 31.4407 i 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 i 3,747.944 3,747.944 1.0549 i i 3,774.317 '� i i i i i i i i i i i • 9 9 i 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 3,747.944 1.0549 3,774.317 9 9 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 11 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 i 1,269.855 1,269.855 0.0908 i 1,272.125 i i � i � i • i '� i i i i i i i i • 5 i 5 i i i 2 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0532 i 0.0346 i 0.3963 1.1100e- i 0.1141 9.5000e- 0.1151 i 0.0303 8.8000e- 0.0311 i 110.4707 110.4707 3.3300e- i 1 110.5539 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.1835 4.1800 1.4144 0.0128 0.3810 0.0137 0.3948 0.1034 0.0131 0.0941 1,382.679 f-77771,380.326 2 17,380.326 2 1 1 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 i 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 � 0.0380 i � 2.0445 � 2.0445 i � 1.8809 � 1.8809 � i 3,685.656 � 3,685.656 � 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 '� i i i i i i i i i • g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 12 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0638 i 0.0415 i 0.4755 1.3300e- i 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 i 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e- i i 132.6646 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e- 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e- 132.6646 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 i i i i 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 i 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.8882 i 40.4971 i 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 i 3,685.656 3,685.656 1.1920 i i 3,715.457 i g 9 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 3,685.656 1.1920 3,715.457 9 9 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 13 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0638 i 0.0415 i 0.4755 1.3300e- i 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 i 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e- i i 132.6646 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0638 0.0415 0.4755 1.3300e- 0.1369 1.1400e- 0.1381 0.0363 1.0500e- 0.0374 132.5649 132.5649 3.9900e- 132.6646 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 � 0.0620 i � 1.9853 � 1.9853 i � 1.8265 � 1.8265 � i 6,007.043 � 6,007.043 � 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 777 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 14 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2021 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0709 i 0.0462 i 0.5284 1.4800e- i 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e- i i 147.4051 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e- 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e- 147.4051 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 4.1912 i 46.3998 i 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 i 6,007.043 6,007.043 1.9428 i i 6,055.613 i i i 4 4 i 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 6,007.043 1.9428 6,055.613 4 4 4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 15 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2021 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0709 i 0.0462 i 0.5284 1.4800e- i 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e- i i 147.4051 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0709 0.0462 0.5284 1.4800e- 0.1521 1.2700e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1700e- 0.0415 147.2943 147.2943 4.4300e- 147.4051 003 003 003 003 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 � 0.0621 i � 1.6349 � 1.6349 i � 1.5041 1.5041 � i 6,011.410 � 6,011.410 � 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i i i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 16 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0665 i 0.0416 i 0.4861 1.4300e- i 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.000Oe- i i 142.2207 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e- 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.000Oe- 142.2207 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust •1 8.6733 i 0.0000 8.6733 i 3.5965 i 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 3.6248 i 38.8435 i 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 i 6,011.410 6,011.410 1.9442 i i 6,060.015 i i i 5 5 i 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 6,011.410 1.9442 6,060.015 5 5 8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 17 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0665 i 0.0416 i 0.4861 1.4300e- i 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 i 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.00OOe- i i 142.2207 003 003 003 003 i Total 0.0665 0.0416 0.4861 1.4300e- 0.1521 1.2300e- 0.1534 0.0404 1.1300e- 0.0415 142.1207 142.1207 4.00OOe- 142.2207 003 003 003 003 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 i 0.0269 0.8090 i 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 18 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.4284 i 13.1673 i 3.8005 � 0.0354 i 0.9155 � 0.0256 0.9412 i 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 3,789.075 0.2381 i i 3,795.028 0 i 0 i i i 3 Worker •i 2.6620 i 1.6677 i 19.4699 0.0571 i 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 i 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 i 5,691.935 5,691.935 0.1602 i i 5,695.940 4 i 4 i i i 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 9,481.010 0.3984 9,490.969 4 4 1 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.7062 i 15.6156 i 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 i 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 i i 2,569.632 6 i 6 i i i 2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 2,554.333 0.6120 2,569.632 6 6 2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 19 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2022 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.4284 i 13.1673 i 3.8005 � 0.0354 i 0.9155 � 0.0256 0.9412 i 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 3,789.075 0.2381 i i 3,795.028 0 i 0 i i i 3 Worker •i 2.6620 i 1.6677 i 19.4699 0.0571 i 6.0932 0.0493 6.1425 i 1.6163 0.0454 1.6617 i 5,691.935 5,691.935 0.1602 i i 5,695.940 4 i 4 i i i 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 9,481.010 0.3984 9,490.969 4 4 1 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 � i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 i i i i i i i i 9 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.658T 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 j j j j j j 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 20 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3183 i 9.9726 i 3.3771 0.0343 i 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 i 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 i 3,671.400 3,671.400 0.2096 i i 3,676.641 7 i 7 i i i 7 Worker •i 2.5029 i 1.5073 i 17.8820 0.0550 i 6.0932 0.0479 � 6.1411 i 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797 5,483.797 0.1442 i i 5,487.402 4 i 4 i i i 0 Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 777 9,155.198 9,155.198 0.3538 9,164.043 1 1 7 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.5728 i 14.3849 i 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 i 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 i i 2,570.406 9 i 9 i 1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 2,555.209 0.6079 2,570.406 11 9 9 1 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 21 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.3183 i 9.9726 i 3.3771 0.0343 i 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 i 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 i 3,671.400 3,671.400 0.2096 i i 3,676.641 '� i i i i i i i i • 7 i 7 i i i 7 Worker •i 2.5029 i 1.5073 i 17.8820 0.0550 i 6.0932 0.0479 � 6.1411 i 1.6163 0.0441 1.6604 5,483.797 5,483.797 0.1442 i i 5,487.402 '� i i i i i i i i • 4 i 4 i i i 0 Total 2.8211 11.4799 21.2591 0.0893 7.0088 0.0601 7.0688 1.8799 0.0557 777 9,155.198 9,155.198 0.3538 9,164.043 1 1 7 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 '� i i i i i i i i 1 i 1 i i i 6 • Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 22 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2023 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0469 i 0.0282 i 0.3349 1.0300e- i 0.1141 9.000Oe- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e- i i 102.7603 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e- 0.1141 9.000Oe- 0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e- 102.7603 003 004 004 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 1.0327 i 10.1917 i 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 i 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 i i 2,225.433 '� i i i i i i i i 1 i 1 i i i 6 • Paving •i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 2,207.584 0.7140 2,225.433 1 1 6 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 23 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2023 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0469 i 0.0282 i 0.3349 1.0300e- i 0.1141 9.00OOe- 0.1150 i 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e- i i 102.7603 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0469 0.0282 0.3349 1.0300e- 0.1141 9.00OOe- 0.1150 0.0303 8.3000e- 0.0311 102.6928 102.6928 2.7000e- 102.7603 003 004 004 003 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 14.6258 i 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 i i 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 i 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 24 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.000Oe- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e- i 99.5663 i i i i i 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.000Oe- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e- 99.5663 003 004 004 003 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Off -Road •i 0.9882 i 9.5246 i 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 i 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 i i 2,225.396 2 i 2 i i i 3 Paving •i 0.0000 i i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2,207.547 0.7140 2,225.396 11 2 2 3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 25 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.00OOe- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e- i 99.5663 i i i i i 003 004 004 003 i Total 0.0444 0.0257 0.3114 1.00OOe- 0.1141 8.8000e- 0.1150 0.0303 8.1000e- 0.0311 99.5045 99.5045 2.4700e- 99.5663 003 004 004 003 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •i 236.4115 0.0000 i 0.0000 i i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 i 2.9700e- i i 0.0609 i 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 i 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 26 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 ��--------------------------------------------'----------------------- --+ ------� -------------'--------------- Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.4734 i 0.2743 i 3.3220 0.0107 i 1.2171 � 9.4300e- 1.2266 i 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,061.381 � 1,061.381 0.0264 i i 1,062.041 003 003 8 8 i 0 Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e- 1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,061.381 1,061.381 0.0264 1,062.041 003 003 8 8 0 Mitigated Construction On -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating •1 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I Off -Road •i 0.1808 i 1.2188 i 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 i 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 i i 281.8443 003 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e- 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 27 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024 Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e I I PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total I Category lb/day lb/day Hauling •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 � ---------------------------------------------'------------------------ --+ ------� -------------'--------------- Vendor •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 � i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Worker •i 0.4734 i 0.2743 i 3.3220 0.0107 i 1.2171 � 9.4300e- 1.2266 i 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,061.381 � 1,061.381 0.0264 i i 1,062.041 003 003 8 8 i 0 Total 0.4734 0.2743 3.3220 0.0107 1.2171 9.4300e- 1.2266 0.3229 8.6800e- 0.3315 1,061.381 1,061.381 0.0264 1,062.041 003 003 8 8 0 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 28 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 9.5233 i 45.9914 i 110.0422 i 0.4681 45.9592 i 0.3373 , 46.2965 i 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 i 47,917.80 47,917.80 2.1953 i : 47,972.68 •� . 05 05 i 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 47,917.80 • 2.1953 - 47,972.68 05 05 39 4.2 Trip Summary 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 ------------T-----------Y------------------------:-------------------------- ......................................----------- General Office Building ; 288.45 ; 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 ......................................--- ----- ------------ - ---- - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -r - High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) ; 2,368.80 ; 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 .................................................. ---------- - ------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -r - Ho.............�---.----192.00 1--T----------- y-------------------------- 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 4.3 Trip Type Information CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 29 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose % I Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW IH-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I Primary I Diverted I Pass -by I 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 Y 40.20 : 1 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 ........................------------------__ __ __ ? _ T _ -------- ---- ------------- General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 ; 19 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down ; 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 8.50 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 72.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 19.00 - - - - - - - - - 37 - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43 .......:......r........�------------------ -- ... ? r--------------.... T.. -------- .r.. -------- ---- r... ------------- Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 ; 58 ; 38 ; 4 .......................• - - - - - - - - - - Quality Restaurant 16.60 - - - - - - - - - 8.40 T - - - - - - - - - . 6.90 - - - - - - - - 12.00 i' - - - - - - - - T 1 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I 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; 0.0007121 0.000821 r Apartments Mid Rise 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712. 0.000821 r General Office Building 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 0.000712: 0.000821 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - -;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;--------------- ;----------------+ - - - - - - - - High Turnover (Sit Down 0.5430881 0.044216: 0.209971: 0.116369: 0.014033: 0.006332: 0.021166: 0.033577: 0.002613: 0.001817: 0.005285: 0.000712: 0.000821 Restaurant) ....................... f........*-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------T-------� _ ..... _ . -0.002613 -0.001817 -0.005285 Hotel 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.014033, 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.000712 0.000821 -----------------------_----------------------- Quality Restaurant 0.5430881 0.0442161 0.2099711 0.1163691 0.0140331 0.0063321 0.0211661 0.0335771 0.0026131 0.0018171 0.0052851 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 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 30 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG I NOx I CO I S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas •i 0.7660 i 6.7462 i 4.2573 0.0418 i i 0.5292 0.5292 i i 0.5292 0.5292 + i 8,355.983 8,355.983 i 0.1602 i 0.1532 1 8,405.638 Mitigated ;i . i 2 2 i 7 NaturalGas 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 • 8,355.983 • 0.1602 0.1532 • 8,405.638 Unmitigated 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 31 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1119.16 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid 35784.3 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1------------------------------------------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------ � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1283.42 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22759.9 •1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r-------1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4769.72 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 1 1 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 Quality 1 5057.75 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � v 1 1 1 1 T""--- 251.616 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 32 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 I Total I I Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Low i 1.11916 4 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e- 8.3400e- i 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 8.3400e- 1 131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e- 2.4100e- 1 132.4486 Rise i '1 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 ----------- 1 i 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 1----------------------- �-------------------------------I-------------- 1-------�-------�---------------------- Apartments Mid i 35.7843 .1 0.3859 1 3.2978 1 1.4033 1 0.0211 1 1 0.2666 1 0.2666 1 1 0.2666 0.2666 1 4,209.916 1 4,209.916 1 0.0807 1 0.0772 i 4,234.933 1 Rise ---------- _ ; 1 I 1 I I I I 1 . 4 I 4 1 I 1 9 1 ; 1 1 1------- ----------------------------- -------�-------�--------------- ------1------- --------------------- r------71_----__ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T General Office 1.28342 .1 0.0138 1 0.1258 1 0.1057 1 7.5000e- 1 1 9.5600e- 1 9.5600e- 1 1 9.5600e- 9.5600e- 1 150.9911 1 150.9911 1 2.8900e- 1 2.7700e- i 151.8884 Building i 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 003 1 003 1 -----------1 ------7------- '1------- ----------------------------------- ----------------------------- ------- � 1 ---------------------1 r11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �I1 1 1 T'------ High Turnover (Sit 22.7599 .1 0.2455 1 2.2314 1 1.8743 1 0.0134 1 1 0.1696 1 0.1696 1 1 0.1696 0.1696 1 2,677.634 1 2,677.634 1 0.0513 1 0.0491 i 2,693.546 Down Restaurant) i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 ---1 ' 1 I I I I I I I , I I I 1 r------�1------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � T Hotel i 4.76972 .1 0.0514 1 0.4676 1 0.3928 1 2.8100e- 1 1 0.0355 1 0.0355 1 1 0.0355 0.0355 1 561.1436 1 561.1436 1 0.0108 1 0.0103 i 564.4782 1 1 I I 003 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 -r------71 j i 1 I I I I I I I , 1 I I I 1 ------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � �-------I-------1 1 1 T'------ Quality 5.05775 •1 0.0545 1 0.4959 1 0.4165 1 2.9800e- 1 1 0.0377 1 0.0377 1 1 0.0377 0.0377 1 595.0298 1 595.0298 1 0.0114 1 0.0109 1 598.5658 Restaurant ; 1 I 1 003 1 --r------71-------1 Regional 1 , I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � � 1 1 1 1 T""--- 0.251616 •1 2.7100e- 0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1.8700e- 1 29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e- 5.4000e- 29.7778 Shopping Center 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ; 003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 . 1 1 004 1 004 1 Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 077 8,355.983 8,355.983 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638 2 2 7 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 33 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated •i 30.5020 i 15.0496 � 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 i 1.5974 i i 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 i 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 i 18,259.11 50 50 92 -------------i i Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 • 18,148.59 - 0.4874 • 0.3300 • 18,259.11 50 50 92 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating•' ' i %i- ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------*------- Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products •' . ' i Hearth •i 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 18,000.00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96 i i i i i i i Landscaping •i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 i 152.1542 003 i i i i i i i i i • Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 50 50 92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 34 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter 6.2 Area by SubCategory Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Subcategory lb/day lb/day Architectural •i 2.2670 i � i i � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating Consumer •i 24.1085 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products Hearth •i 1.6500 i 14.1000 6.0000 i 0.0900 1.1400 i 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 i 18,000.00 18,000.00 i 0.3450 1 0.3300 1 18,106.96 ---- -- - - - ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - --- - -- ------------------------------ Landscaping i 2.4766 i 0.9496 82.4430 i 4.3600e- i 0.4574 i 0.4574 i 0.4574 0.4574 i 148.5950 148.5950 i 0.1424 152.1542 003 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 18,148.59 18,148.59 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11 j j F-777000 50 50 j 92 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 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 Page 35 of 35 Date: 1/12/2021 2:30 PM Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter Fire Pumos and Emeraencv Generators IEquipment Type I Number I Hours/Day I Hours/Year I Horse Power I Load Factor I Fuel Type I Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Attachment C Local Hire Provision Net Change Without Local Hire Provision Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) Amortized (MT CO2e/year) 3,623 120.77 With Local Hire Provision Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) Amortized (MT CO2e/year) % Decrease in Construction -related GHG Emissions 3,024 100.80 17% EXHIBIT B f;WA � tetAeiical C sultmlon. Data Analysm and Lidgai* Support far vie Ew+lmmmrmt Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Principal Environmental Chemist Education 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(i�swauexmn Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 231 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 23' Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019 Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 231 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 — DIOWN2006. 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 5 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 6 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 7 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, 112' 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. Oi9-L-2295 Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017 In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warm 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 8 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 NO. 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 17' 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 9 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: 1 0-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 Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019 EXHIBIT C •3+ ■t Technical Cwsunaticm. Data Analysis and ■� ApE Li[ gafiion Supportfur the Enxiroment Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP 1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa Santa Monica, California 90401 Tel: (949) 887-9013 Email: mhagemann@swape.com 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. • 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 "part B" 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 EPA's 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. 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. 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 Characterization and Cleanup at 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. 0 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. E EXHIBIT D CONFpR 4___ ftL COPY K) AL fttgOffLOf CaMorrft Lee Ang fee AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES APR 05 2021 Case Number: 19STCP05445 ShittiaC�ist,E�oa�tdive0��otCotgt Hearing Date: March 3, 2021 ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AND COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Through its Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Injunctive Relief (the petition) Petitioner, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, challenges the certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) by Respondent, the City of Los Angeles. Petitioner seeks an order requiring the City to "vacate and withdraw the certification of the EIR and all Project Entitlements. . . ." (Pet., Prayer 11 A.) Petitioner contends it is entitled to relief because the City violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. ). Both the City and Real Party in Interest, Southern California Flower Growers, Inc. (Flower Growers) oppose the petition. The petition is granted. STATEMENT OF THE CASE' The Project. The project is a mixed -use development located on just under four acres in the downtown area of the City.' The site is currently the Southern California Flower Market, a wholesale market owned and occupied by the Flower Growers. (AR 778, 810, 866-67.) The project site contains two buildings; the South Building, which was built in 1962 or 1963, and the North Building, which was built as part of the flower market's expansion in 1981. (AR 778, 866-868.) The buildings are two stories with a parking deck above. (AR 868.) The project renovates and upgrades the North building, which will continue to operate as a flower market. The project will demolish the South Building and replace it with a new twelve story, mixed -use development comprised of 323 residential units and 167,248 square feet of non-residential uses —retail, office, restaurant, wholesale storage and event space (the Project). (AR 719, 4462-4463.) ' AR refers to the administrative record. 2The site is bounded by 7th Street, 8th Street, Maple Avenue, and Wall Street. (AR 748, 791.) Page 1 of 21 The City's Approval of the Project. - On May 22, 2017, the City issue a notice of preparation for the Project. On September 20, 2018, the City released a 600-page Draft EIR (DEIR) for the Project. (AR 4086-4087,1321.) The City issued the Final EIR3 on April 12, 2019. (AR 4087.) The City conducted a public hearing on the EIR in May 2019. (AR 5-156, 4410-11.) Thereafter, on June 3, 2019, the City's Advisory Agency, certified the EIR, adopted the CECIA findings and a mitigation, monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), and approved the Project ° (AR 5-156, 4410-11.) Two entities appealed the Advisory Agency's decision on June 13, 2019.5 (AR 6715, 6869.) The appeals raised concerns about the Project's construction noise and air quality impacts. (AR 3574-77, 6869-80.) The City Planning Commission (CPC) heard and denied the appeals on August 26, 2019. The CPC certified the EIR and affirmed the Advisory Agency's Project approval. (AR 157-312, 4412-4420, 4425-4427, 4429-4531.) On September 5, 2019, Petitioner appealed the CPC's decision. (AR 8457-8464.) On October 29, 2019, after holding another public hearing, the City's Planning and Land Use Management Committee voted unanimously to recommend that the full City Council deny the appeals and approve the Project. (AR 440-445, 4543-4547, 4548- 4602.) At a public meeting on November 12, 2019, the City Council voted unanimously to deny the appeals and approve the Project. (AR 709-710, 4603-4623.) The writ petition ensued. STANDARD OF REVIEW In reviewing an agency's compliance with CEClA during the course of its legislative or quasi - legislative actions, the trial court's inquiry during a mandamus proceeding "'shall extend only to whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion,"' which is established "'if the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law or if the determination or decision is not supported by substantial evidence.' " (Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 426 [citing Pub. Resources Code § 21168.5].) "In evaluating an EIR for CEQA compliance, ... a reviewing court must adjust its scrutiny to the nature of the alleged defect, depending on whether the claim is predominantly one of improper procedure or a dispute over the facts." (Id. at 435.) 3 The court refers to the Final EIR herein as the EIR. The court designates any specific references to the Draft EIR as DEIR herein. °The Advisory Agency also approved the tract map on June 3, 2019. (AR 4299.) The City issued three errata to the EIR during the administrative review process: Erratum No. 1 on July 26, 2019; Erratum No. 2 on August 7, 2019; and Erratum No. 3 on October 18, 2019. (AR 4326.) 'American Florists Exchange, Ltd. and the Coalition for Responsible Equitable Economic Development appealed the Advisory Agency's decision. Page 2 of 21 CEQA requires an EIR to "be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences." (Guidelines6 § 15151; Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (Friant Ranch) (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, 516.) "An EIR's designation of a particular environmental effect as 'significant' does not excuse the EIR's failure to reasonably describe the nature and magnitude of the adverse effect." (id. at 514.) "[T]here must be a disclosure of the 'analytic route the ... agency traveled from evidence to action.' " (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 404.) "[A] conclusory discussion of an environmental impact that an EIR deems significant can be determined by a court to be inadequate as an informational document without reference to substantial evidence." (Friant Ranch, supra, 6 Cal.5th at 514.) If the deficiencies in an EIR preclude "informed decisionmaking and public participation, the goals of CEQA are thwarted and a prejudicial abuse of discretion has occurred." (Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 128.) "Where the alleged defect is that the agency has failed to proceed in the manner required by law, the court determines de novo whether the agency has employed the correct procedures, scrupulously enforcing all legislatively mandated requirements." (Chico Advocates for a Responsible Economy v. City of Chico (2019) 40 Cal.App.5th 839, 845.) With respect to "all substantial evidence challenges, an appellant challenging an EIR for insufficient evidence must lay out the evidence favorable to the other side and show why it is lacking. Failure to do so is fatal. A reviewing court will not independently review the record to make up for appellant's failure to carry his burden." (Defend the Bay v. City of Irvine (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1261,1266.) Moreover, "the reviewing court'may not set aside an agency's approval of an EIR on the ground that an opposite conclusion would have been equally or more reasonable/ for, on factual questions, our task 'is not to weigh conflicting evidence and determine who has the better argument.' " (Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova, supra, 40 Cal.4th at 435.) "Regardless of what is alleged, an EIR approved by a governmental agency is presumed legally adequate, and the party challenging the EIR has the burden of showing otherwise." (Chico Advocates for a Responsible Economy v. City of Chico, supra, 40 Cal.App.5th at 846.) 6 The CEQA Guidelines are found at Title 14 Cal. Code Regs §§ 15000 et seq. Page 3 of 21 ANALYSIS Petitioner contends the EIR analysis of the Project's environmental impacts is flawed as to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, air quality and noise. The court addresses the claims in turn. GHG Impacts: Petitioner claims the City's analysis under the "first significance threshold"' does not comply with CEQA. Petitioner's arguments arise in three general categories that are all related in some way to the City's selection of a significance threshold for GHG impacts. First, Petitioner contends the EIR's GHG analysis is inaccurate, confusing and misleading. Second, Petitioner asserts the City selected an inappropriate significance threshold. Third, Petitioner argues the EIR fails as an informal document for decisionmakers and informed public participation because it omits any analysis of Senate Bill (SB) 32 codified at Health and Safety Code section 38566. Guidelines section 15064.4, subdivision (a) provides: "A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project; and/or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards." Thus, under the Guidelines, the City had the option of selecting a quantitative or qualitative significance threshold for GHG emissions "based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data." (Guidelines § 15064, subd. (b).) Further, "California's CEQA Guidelines ... recognize that an agency's adoption of a threshold of significance requires an exercise of reasoned judgment." (Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment & Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.Sth 160, 206.) A city's choice of a significance threshold "will be upheld if founded on substantial evidence." (ibid.) First, Petitioner argues the City's "discussion of the GHG significance thresholds violates CEQA" because "it is inaccurate and confusing." (Reply 5:33 [emphasis added].) The court disagrees. A reasonable reading of the EIR and the City's selection of a significance threshold does not support Petitioner's claim. The City explained because the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the City "have yet to adopt project -level significance thresholds for GHG emissions that would be applicable to the Project," the City obtained its primary direction for GHG emissions analysis from the Guidelines. (AR 917.) The City reported a project could have a significant environmental impact if the project generated GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment, or if the project would conflict with "an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions" of GHG. (AR 14:917.) After a straight -forward plain language discussion in plain in ' Petitioner contends the City has relied upon two significance thresholds for GHG emissions. As discussed herein, the court disagrees. The EIR provides a single threshold of significance for GHG emissions. Page 4 of 21 the EIR concerning the selection of significance thresholds, the City reported "the Project would not have a significant effect on the environment if it is found to be consistent with the applicable regulatory plans and policies to reduce GHG emissions." (AR 920.) The City thereafter set forth the applicable plans and policies for which it considered consistency in the context of GHG emissions. (AR 14:920.) The EIR methodically discusses the Project and the applicable plans and policies. Petitioner has not demonstrated the EIR's significance threshold discussion would mislead or confuse decisionmakers or public participants. Second, without expressly so stating, much of Petitioner's argument related to GHG emissions theorizes the City abused its discretion in deciding not to use a quantitative threshold of significance for the Project. Petitioner contends the SCAQMD quantitative thresholds of significance should have been used for the Project as they are "the most appropriate ... to apply because the Project is a mixed -use project." (Opening Brief 14:17-18.) Petitioner thus contends the City engaged in "threshold shopping" for the Project. Petitioner speculates the City uses the SCAQMD's recommended thresholds of significance "to analyze projects where emissions are below the threshold." (Opening Brief 14:32-35.) Petitioner cites three such projects in the City's downtown area where the City used SCAQMD's thresholds of significance to find a project's GHG emissions had less than significant impacts. (AR 6495-6496.) The City explained it elected not to rely on SCAQMD's 2008 draft guidance (as revised in 2010) because neither the City nor SCAQMD "has adopted numeric thresholds for greenhouse gas emissions for land use development projects (e.g., residential/commercial projects) such as the Project." (AR 2820.) The City elaborated: As further explained in the Draft EIR, in 2008, the SCAQMD convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CECIA documents. In December 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted interim GHG significance thresholds for projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency. That threshold uses a tiered approach to determine a project's significance, with 10,000 metric tons Of CO2 equivalent (MTCO2e) per year as a screening numerical threshold for stationary sources. In September 2010, the Working Group released additional revisions that recommended a screening threshold of 3,500 MTCO2e for residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e for commercial projects, and 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed use projects. The SCAQMD has not since adopted those thresholds, nor has the SCAQMD provided a timeline for formal consideration of those thresholds. In the meantime, the thresholds in the SCAQMD's guidance document are used as a non -binding guide. A lead agency is not required under CEQA to rely on draft regulatory standards that have not been adopted as significance thresholds. (AR 2820-2821.) Page 5 of 21 While the City may have chosen to use the SCAQMD's guidance as thresholds of significance (as it apparently has done with at least three other projects) in the past, the City was not required to do so. (Guidelines § 15064.7, subd. (c). See also Guidelines § 15064.4, subd. (b)(3).) The Guidelines do "not mandate the use of absolute numerical thresholds to measure the significance of greenhouse gas emissions." (Center for Biological Diversity v. Deportment of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 221.) Accordingly, Petitioner has not met its burden of demonstrating the City's selection of the significance threshold is not supported by substantial evidence. Third, Petitioner contends the EIR's GHG emissions analysis is inconsistent with SB 32. That is, Petitioner attacks the City's finding the Project is "consisten[t] with the policies in SB 32 and Executive Order B-30-15, which includes the GHG reduction goals codified in SB 32." (Opposition Brief 17:2-3.) Petitioner contends "[t]he EIR includes compliance with Executive Order B-30-15 on the list of measures it must comply with for the Project's GHG emissions to be considered insignificant.. . and the Project does not comply with that executive order." (Reply 8:22-25.) Petitioner is correct to the extent there is no substantial evidence to support the City's position on Executive Order (EO) 8-30-15. As an initial matter, the City and Flower Growers argue Petitioner failed to exhaust its administrative remedies on the issue of "CARB's 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides strategies to achieve the 2040 GHG emission goals set in SB 32." (Opposition Brief 17:12-14.) The court disagrees. The broader issue of overall compliance with SB 32—however that might be achieved —was squarely presented to the City during the administrative proceedings. SWAPE8 specifically raised the issue of SB 32 in its written comments to the DEIR. (AR 2900, 2922.) SWAPE wrote: AB 32 requires California to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. However, in September 2016, prior to the release of the IS/MND, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 32, enacting Health and Safety Code § 38566. [] This statue ("SB 32") requires California to achieve a new, more aggressive 40% reduction in GHG emissions over the 1990 levels by 2030. 'This 40 percent reduction is widely acknowledged as a necessary interim target to ensure that California meets its longer -range goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050.' Therefore, by failing to demonstrate consistency with the reduction targets set forth by SB 32, the Project may conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. As a result, the Project may have a potentially significant impact that was not previously addressed in the DEIR, and as such, a revised EIR should be prepared. (AR 2922.) 8 SWAPE is an acronym for Soil Water Air Protection Enterprises. SWAPE provides technical consultation, data analysis, and litigation support for the environment. (AR 2927.) Page 6 of 21 SWAPE also advised the City —with expert opinion —"to reach the statewide goal of 259 MTCOie, California would have to reduce its emissions by 49 percent below the `business -as - usual' levels. This reduction target indicates that compliance with these more aggressive reduction goals, beyond what is mandated by AB 32, will be necessary." (AR 2923.) As acknowledged by the City and Flower Growers, the legislature codified EO B-30-15 at SB 32. (Opposition Brief 17:3.) Executed by Governor Brown on April 29, 2015, two years before the notice of preparation, EO 8-30-15 provides in part: "A new interim statewide greenhouse emission reduction target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 is established in order to ensure California meets its target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050." SB 32, codified at Health and Safety Code section 38566, effective January 1, 2017 (prior to the City's notice of preparation) provides: "In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by this division, the state board shall ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030." The EIR reports the Project's GHG emissions are "consistent" 9 with EO B-30-15. (AR 926.) The EIR's discussion of EO 8-30-15 in its "Consistency Analysis" reports the order's target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. (AR 926-927.) In fact, the EIR suggests the Project is actually consistent and compliant with EO B-30-15: "As such, given the reasonably anticipated decline in Project emissions once fully constructed and operational, the Project is consistent with the Executive Order's horizon -year goal."10 (AR 926.) The issue raised by Petitioner is whether there is substantial evidence for the EIR's claim to decisionmakers and public participants the Project does not conflict with EO 8-30-15--"an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions" of GHG. (AR 14:917.) The City's position of consistency with EO B-30-15 requires substantial evidence. 9 "Consistent" means "marked by harmony, regularity, or steady continuity" and "marked by agreement." (www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consistent.) 10The EIR's use of a singular possessive form as opposed to a plural possessive form makes the analysis where the EIR discusses two executive orders unclear. In any event, the statement implies quantitative compliance with required GHG emission reductions by 2030. The City's findings, however, make clear the City intended the statement to apply to both executive orders. (AR 235.) Page 7 of 21 Certainly, the EIR acknowledges a 2030 GHG emissions target exists under the law; in its Consistency Analysis, however, the EIR provides no information about that target or how the Project's GHG emissions are consistent with it. The EIR's claim "the Project's post-2020 emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with the 2030 and 2050 targets and Executive Order ... 8-30-15" appears to be unsupported by substantial evidence. (AR 927.) Moreover, the EIR reports "[m]any of the emission reduction strategies recommended by CARB would serve to reduce the Project's post-2020 emissions level to the extent applicable by law ...." (AR 927 [emphasis added].) The EIR, however, provides no analysis to support the claim the Project's GHG emissions comply with Health and Safety Code section 38566. That is, "applicable law."11 In fact, the only evidence on the issue suggests otherwise. (AR 2923 [49 percent reduction required for compliance versus Project's 33 percent reduction].) During argument the Flower Growers directed the court to evidence the City could have considered to find the Project is consistent with EO B-30-15. The evidence, however, is not substantial evidence supporting the claim the Project's post-2020 emissions will be reduced to the level required by EO B-30-15 as reported in the EIR. For example, the EIR's discussion of EO B-30-15 explains "a statewide GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030." (AR 902.) Citing a "recent study," the EIR reports "the state's existing and proposed regulatory framework will allow the state to reduce its GHG emissions level to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (consistent with Executive Order B-30- 15), and to 60 percent below 1990 levels by 2050." (AR 903.) While the City cited the study by footnote, the study did not address the Project and its GHG emissions.12 Thus, the discussion and study are not substantial evidence of the Project's compliance with EO B-30-15. In addition, the Project's reduction in GHG emissions related to design features (AR 924-925) does not address compliance with EO B-30-15. The order sets forth a quantitative standard. The EIR's general reference to design features and GHG does not inform on consistency with that quantitative standard. "The City found, "As such, the Project's post-2020 emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with the 2030 and 2050 targets and Executive Order 5-3-05 and 8-30- 15." (AR 235 [emphasis added].) The statement is misleading because it implies the Project meets EO B-30-15's emissions target when there is no substantial evidence to support the City's position. 12 The court does not have access to the study cited in the footnote. The EIR's narrative suggests the study concerned "various combinations of policies" to assist emission levels to "remain very low through 2050 ...." (AR 903.) In the unlikely event the general study addressed the Project, the court notes "a report'buried in an appendix,' is not a substitute for good faith reasoned analysis ...."' (Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach (2017) 2 Cal.Sth 918, 941 [citation omitted].) Page 8 of 21 The EIR's discussion of the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) does address GHG emission reductions. (AR 911, 930-931.) The discussion, however, does not inform on the Project's consistency with EO B-30-15. Finally, relying on Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. Son Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, the City argues it had no obligation to consider EO B-30-15. In Cleveland National Forest Foundation, the petitioners argued the agency "should have evaluated the plan's impacts against an executive order signed" by the governor. (Id. at 503.) The Supreme Court disagreed. The agency in Cleveland National Forest Foundation, however, did not adopt a significance threshold of express consistency with an executive order as the City did here. (See id. at 507 [three measures of significance].) That is, the agency in Cleveland National Forest Foundation did not represent the project was consistent with a particular executive order and establish its significance threshold in part on such consistency. Based on the foregoing, the court finds the EIR's claim of consistency with EO B-30-15 and the policies therein is not supported by substantial evidence. Thus, the EIR's conclusions that GHG emissions do not exceed the City's chosen significance threshold is unsupported. The City abused its discretion in finding GHG emissions would not have a substantial environmental impact. "[A] conclusory discussion of an environmental impact that an EIR deems significant can be determined by a court to be inadequate as an informational document without reference to substantial evidence." (Friant Ranch, supra, 6 Cal.5th at 514.) Petitioner is entitled to relief based on the EIR's incomplete discussion of GHG emission impacts.13 Air Quality Impacts: The EIR reports the Project's construction emissions would cause significant regional and local air quality impacts based on nitrogen oxides (NOx) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). (AR 843.) Thus, the Project required mitigation measures for air quality impacts. (AR 843.) Petitioner contends the EIR fails to adequately analyze and mitigate construction -related impacts on air quality. 13 During argument, the parties argued about the meaning of Table 4.F-5. (AR 922.) The City contended the table calculations demonstrated compliance with EO B-30-15 while Petitioner argued it did not. The narrative accompanying the table indicates the Project is consistent with the 2014 Revised AB 32 Scoping Plan because of a reduction target of 15.3 percent. There is no discussion of EO B-30-15. Whether the table's information is consistent with EO B-3-15—and the court could not determine one way or the other even after the aid of argument —is unclear and does not inform decisionmakers or public participation. Page 9 of 21 1. Mitigation Measure (MM) C-1 MM C-1 requires "[a]II off -road construction equipment greater than 50 horsepower" satisfy United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "Tier 4 emissions standards to reduce NOx and PM2.5 emissions at the Project Site." (AR 849.) The EIR states "[a]ny emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations." (AR 849.) "For projects for which an EIR has been prepared, where substantial evidence supports the approving agency's conclusion that mitigation measures will be effective, courts will uphold such measures against attacks based on their alleged inadequacy." (Sacramento Old City Assn. v. City Council (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1011,1027.) A reviewing court, however, will not defer to the agency if there is no substantial evidence in the record showing the mitigation measure is feasible and effective, or if the feasibility or effectiveness of the mitigation measure "def[ies] common sense." (Gray v. County of Madera (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1116-1117.) Petitioner contends MM C-1 is both ineffective and infeasible. The parties' argument here centers on the meaning of Tier 4 standards for the construction equipment to be used for the Project. Petitioner contends there are two Tier 4 standards —an interim standard and a final standard.14 Petitioner reports the CalEEMod calculations are based on a Tier 4 final standard —an assumption all construction equipment used for the Project with a horsepower greater than 50 comply Tier 4 final standards. (AR 2908 [citing Appendix E-1]; see also AR 1475-1478, 1507-1510, 1544-1547.) Therefore, to the extent MM C-1 permits the Flower Growers to use equipment with a Tier 4 interim standard, the required mitigation will not be achieved. That is, the CalEEMod calculation on which the effectiveness of MM C-1 is based assumes a Tier 4 final standard for all construction equipment exceeding 50 horsepower. MM C-1, however, does not require all equipment to be Tier 4 final compliant. The City dismisses Petitioner's claim as nothing more than a "red herring." (Opposition 21:18.) The City reasons Tier 4 "interim" standards were only in effect for a short period of time for certain manufacturers. The interim period ended in 2018 well before the City issued the EIR in 2019. (AR 2803, 4303-4304.) The EIR explains: "Tier 4 engines have been phased in nationwide since 2008 for all engine types. While some manufacturers were given limited flexibility, to phase in compliant engines under the Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (TPEM), this provided up '" There seems to be no dispute Tier 4 final standards are more stringent (allow less emissions) than Tier 4 interim standards. (AR 2909, 2803.) Page 10 of 21 to seven years of additional time to offer such equipment. For engines less than 56 horsepower (hp), this TPEM period ended at the end of 2014. Engines between 56- 130 hp had until the end of 2018, while larger engines of 130 hp or more ended at the end of 2017. As a result, Tier 4 equipment is commercially available from all manufacturers, especially for common types of equipment to be used during the construction phases for this Project." (AR 2803 [emphasis added].) The City sidesteps and avoids the issue. (See AR 6621-6622.) MM C-1 relies on Tier 4 equipment. CalEEMod calculations —demonstrating effective mitigation —are based on Tier 4 final standards for construction equipment exceeding 50 horsepower. The City does not require, however, that all equipment exceeding 50 horsepower used for construction have been manufactured in 2019 and later —that is, when Tier 4 final standards were required. Thus, MM C-1 permits, for example, construction equipment with 130 horsepower manufactured in 2018 under the Tier 4 interim standard to be used on the Project. To the extent the City permits such equipment to be used, it would be inconsistent with CaIEEMod calculations and undermine the mitigation. During argument, the City suggested its interpretation of MM C-1 requires equipment for the Project to use Tier 4 final standards. The City contends its CaIEEMod calculations support its intent. That is, if the City did not intend for all equipment to meet such standards it would not have used such a setting in its CaIEEMod calculations.15 The City also noted the Flower Growers concede MM C-1 requires Tier 4 final standard engines and so advised the City: "It should be noted that the measure refers to the use of Tier 4-certified engines, not the less effective Tier 4-interim certified engines." (AR 10136.) The MMRP will require compliance with Tier 4 final standards for MM C-1. Whether the Project is complying with MM C-1 will not turn on the good faith of an "on -the -hood -of -a -truck" analysis of the mitigation measure by a contractor, as suggested by Petitioner during argument. Instead, the MMRP requires: "[S]pecifically during the construction phase and prior to the issuance of building permits, the [Flower Growers] shall retain an independent Construction Monitor (either via the City or through a third -party consultant), approved by the City of Is Additionally, the City differentiated between Tier 4 standards (which the City considers final standards) and Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (TPEM) standards in the EIR. Thus, the City's language in MM C-1 would not support two Tier 4 standards, final and interim. Under the City's view, there is a Tier 4 standard and a TPEM standard. If the City had intended to include an "interim" Tier 4 standard in the MM, it would have used TPEM. In any event, this distinction provides additional support to the City's intent and the enforceable performance standard used for the MM. Page 11 of 21 Los Angeles Department of City Planning, who shall be responsible for monitoring implementation of Project design features and mitigation measures during construction activities consistent with the monitoring phase and frequency set forth in this [MMRP]." (AR 143.) Thus, while MM C-1 could have been more precise, the City's intent is clear, and the MM contains a specific performance standard. Moreover, the Flower Growers have acknowledged MM C-1 requires construction equipment with Tier 4 final standards (or its equivalent) be used for the Project. The MMRP will "ensure compliance during project implementation." (Pub. Resources Code § 21081.6, subd. (a).) While Petitioner contends the City uses a performance standard addressing only particulate but not NOx emissions (Opening Brief 18:14-19), the court is unpersuaded. MM C-1 requires any construction equipment meet both standards —Tier 4 final and a Level 3 diesel emission control strategy. (AR 849 ["In addition"].) Based on the foregoing, the court finds the City's determination MM C-1 will be effective at mitigating air quality impacts to a less -than -significant level during construction is supported by substantial evidence. a. Feasibility and Enforceability of MM C-1 According to Petitioner, MM C-1 "does not provide either feasible or enforceable means to ensure significant air quality impacts will be avoided." (Opening Brief 19:5-6.) Petitioner argues MM C-1 is inadequate to ensure avoidance of significant impacts to the air quality "because of practical obstacles in obtaining the required technology." (Opening Brief 19:10-11.) Petitioner reports while Tier 4 standards have been phased in for construction equipment manufactured since 2008 (Tier 4 interim) and 2014 (Tier 4 Final), "a large portion of the construction equipment currently in use was manufactured to lower standards." (Opening Brief 19:16-17 [citing AR 2910-2911].)16 Petitioner contends the City's claim Tier 4 standards construction equipment is readily available is unsupported by substantial evidence. Thus, Petitioner claims the EIR's conclusion supporting feasibility —the availability of equipment — fails. Petitioner's argument alleging a lack of appropriate construction equipment is based on speculation. Petitioner's reliance on a seven -year -old report from 2014—just after Tier 4 final 16 "In 2014, 25% of all offroad equipment in the state of California were equipped with Tier 2 engines, approximately 12% were equipped with Tier 3 engines, approximately 18% were equipped with Tier 4 Interim engines, and only 4% were equipped with Tier 4 Final engines." Page 12 of 21 standards phased in —does not meet Petitioner's burden on the issue. The City's position "it is reasonable to conclude that the market has produced many more Tier 4-compliant engines" since 2014 is reasonable and appropriate given Petitioner's speculation. (Opposition 23:2-3.) This is especially true given the passage of time and such equipment being available from all manufacturers. (AR 2806.) More importantly, if Flower Growers cannot secure specific Tier 4 equipment as required by MM C-1, Flower Growers will be required to "work with the City's Building and Safety Department on equivalent alternatives that minimize tailpipe emissions from off -road equipment." (AR 2803.) The term "equivalent" means the Flower Growers must demonstrate the proffered alternative "meets or exceeds" Tier 4 standards thereby meeting necessary emission reductions in NOx and PM2.5. (AR 4303-4304.) .Based on the speculative nature of Petitioner's claim concerning feasibility, the court finds Petitioner did not meet its burden of demonstrating the City abused its discretion when it found MM C-1 is feasible.17 2. Air Quality Impacts to Sensitive Receptors Petitioner takes issue with the City's selection and identification of sensitive receptors and their proximity to the Project. The flaw, according to Petitioner, undermines the EIR's air quality analysis. Petitioner notes the EIR identifies the "nearest" sensitive receptors at distances of 220 (school), 240 (apartment building), 440 (apartment building) and 700 (apartment building) feet from the Project. (AR 836.) Petitioner reports there is an apartment building within 55 feet of the Project and another closer than 240 feet. (AR 778, 3173, 6874-6875.) Petitioner argues that these omissions are misleading by creating the impression for decisionmakers and the participating public there are few sensitive uses in close proximity to the Project.18 To the extent selection of a group of sensitive receptors is a methodology issue, the City is entitled to deference on its methodology.19 Thus, the decision is subject to substantial evidence review. (City of Long Beach v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 889, 898.) 17The court's finding MM C-1 is effective sufficiently responds to Petitioner's claim concerning enforceability. 1'Additionally, Petitioner argues the EIR's air quality impacts on sensitive receptors is inadequate because it relies on the MM C-1 to render the impact less than significant. Of course, the court's earlier analysis of MM C-1 would be equally applicable here. 19That said, the court is not persuaded the issue is, in fact, a methodology issue. Page 13 of 21 The City's use of SCAQMD guidance on the issue does not actually support selection issues. That is, nothing in the SCAQMD guidance instructs on selection of sensitive receptors over others. (AR 832-848, 845.) Thus, the SCAQMD guidance is not substantial evidence. In the EIR, the City "disclose[d] the location of a number of representative sensitive receptors near the Project Site" including residential and non-residential uses. (AR 7232.) The City's response to public comment is instructive: "Almost all of the other residential uses identified by the commentor are at the same distance from the Project site as the Santee Court Apartments (i.e., the Santee Village Apartments) or even a further distance away from the Project site (i.e., the Garment Lofts are 40 feet further away than the Santee Court Apartments and the Santee Village Lofts are 60 feet further away than the Santee Court Apartments). Moreover, compliance with SCAQMD's thresholds of significance will avoid any significant impact to any of these sensitive receptors and the EIR demonstrates that mitigated construction emissions would be less than all the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance. (Refer to Draft EIR, pages 4.C-19 through 23.) This conclusion would apply regardless of the location of any receptor pursuant to SCAQMD guidance." (AR 7232; see also AR 3570-3571.) The court finds Petitioner has not met its burden of demonstrating a prejudicial abuse of discretion even assuming the City abused its discretion in its selection of sensitive receptors. Petitioner has not suggested any legal requirement that every sensitive receptor within close proximity of a Project must be identified. "CEQA requires only that the agency 'use its best efforts to find out and disclose all that it reasonably can' (Guidelines, § 15144), and that the EIR display 'adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure' (Guidelines, § 15151)." (Planning & Conservation League v. Castak Lake Water Agency (2009)180 Cal.App.4th 210, 253. ) Further, Petitioner fails to demonstrate the City sampling is misleading --other than to the extent the City did not include every single sensitive receptor in close proximity to the Project. The City's expert concluded the Project would avoid significant impacts to all receptors in the vicinity because the Project's mitigated construction emissions will fall below SCAQMD's thresholds measured at the source of the emissions. (AR 3570-3571, 4068, 7232.) Petitioner does not suggest with evidence the EIR's analysis and conclusions would be different with respect to the omitted sensitive receptors as opposed to the receptors the City considered and analyzed. Accordingly, Petitioner shows no prejudicial abuse of discretion. Page 14 of 21 3. Disclosure of Health Risks Associated with Air Quality Impacts Petitioner argues the Project fails to adequately discuss the connections between potential pollutant emissions and resulting human health impacts. Such analysis, Petitioner contends, is required by Guidelines section 15126.2, subdivision (a). Petitioner asserts the EIR failed to discuss the health risks related to the estimated level of construction and operational emissions. (AR 827-850.) The EIR therefore does not comply with the Supreme Court's direction in Friant Ranch that a "[p]roject's health effects must be "clearly identified" and the discussion must include "relevant specifics" about the environmental changes attributable to the Project and their associated health outcomes." (Friant Ranch, supra, 6 Cal.Sth at 518.) Further, Petitioner argues the City's 2019 Health Risk Assessment (HRA) does not "fill the gap in the EIR's analysis." (Opening Brief 23:28.) The HRA contains no analysis of operational emissions and merely addresses construction -related emissions of diesel particulate matter. (AR 846.) Under SCAQMD guidance, an HRA is recommended for "substantial sources of diesel particulate emissions (e.g., truck stops and warehouse distribution facilities) ...." (AR 846.) The City determined —and there is no challenge to the City's finding —the "Project would not result in any substantial emissions of toxic air contaminants (TAC) during the construction or operations phase." (AR 846.) The EIR explains: "The Project would not result in any substantial emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) during the construction or operations phase. During the construction phase, the primary air quality impacts would be associated with the combustion of diesel fuels, which produce exhaust -related particulate matter that is considered a toxic air contaminant by CARB based on chronic exposure to these emissions. However, construction activities would not produce chronic, long-term exposure to diesel particulate matter. During long-term project operations, the Project does not include typical sources of acutely and chronically hazardous TACs such as industrial manufacturing processes and automotive repair facilities. As a result, the Project would not create substantial concentrations of TACs. In addition, the SCAQMD recommends that health risk assessments be conducted for substantial sources of diesel particulate emissions (e.g., truck stops and warehouse distribution facilities) and has provided guidance for analyzing mobile source diesel emissions. The Project would not generate a substantial number of truck trips. Based on the limited activity of TAC sources, the Project would not Page 15 of 21 warrant the need for a health risk assessment associated with on -site activities. Therefore, Project impacts related to TACs would be less than significant." (AR 846; see also AR 2964-66.) Contrary to Petitioner's position, Friant Ranch, does not require more from the City. The Project does not exceed any SCAQMD significance threshold for air quality impacts or trigger any criteria requiring an HRA. Petitioner has not met its burden of demonstrating a prejudicial abuse of discretion based on a failure to adequately discuss the connections between potential pollutant emissions and resulting human health impacts.20 Noise Impacts: Petitioner contends the EIR fails to adequately analyze and mitigate construction -related environmental impacts as to noise. 1. Disclosure of Impacts to Sensitive Receptors Petitioner takes issue with the EIR's purported failure to analyze the construction -noise impacts at the Textile Building Lofts, a location merely 55 feet from the Project. The EIR does not contain any noise analysis to any sensitive receptors at this location. In fact, the first discussion by the City about the noise impacts to the Textile Building Lofts is contained in Erratum No. 3. (AR 3173, 3342-3343.) Petitioner contends the City's analysis is flawed. Petitioner believes the daytime ambient noise level of 64.8 dBA, based on measurements on Maple Avenue, is overstated for the Textile Building Lofts. (AR 3343.) The City's inaccurate 64.8 dBA daytime noise level assumption, according to Petitioner, led to a conclusion of only a 1.3 dBA daytime noise level increase such that the Project's construction -noise impacts did not exceed the 5 dBA level noise increase significance threshold. (AR 3343.) Based on expert opinion, however, Petitioner reports the City's ambient noise level determination failed to take into account the 12-story height of the Textile Building Lofts. Higher stories have lower ambient noise levels. (AR 10085-10086 [identifying ambient noise is as low as 58.5 for the twelfth floor].) The daytime ambient noise levels are not the same "for all floors of the Textile Building [Lofts] because the higher floors are farther from the road traffic than lower floors." (AR 10085.) Thus, the City's conclusion construction -noise related impacts 20 Petitioner appears to have abandoned the argument in reply. Page 16 of 21 to the Textile Building Lofts is flawed —it is based on an "unsupported assumption about existing ambient noise levels." (Opening Brief 25:15-16.) The City's expert does not address the ambient daytime noise level for the higher floors of the Textile Building Lofts. The City's expert did consider the building, however, using the same methodology used in the DEIR. (AR 4305.) The City's expert determined the Textile Building Lofts would experience an increase in noise based on construction of 1.3 dBA (or less). (AR 3173-74, 7229.) Further, Project construction -related noise impacts are expected to remain below the City's 5 dBA significance threshold. (AR 3343, 7229.) In a June 19, 2019 memorandum, the City's noise expert explained: "[T]his [Maple Street for the Textile Building Lofts] baseline noise level is far greater than the 50.8 dBA Leq noise level used to represent baseline conditions at the Santee Court Apartments receptor. Utilizing the same construction source and mitigation assumptions that were used for the Santee Court Apartments analysis, as Textile Building Lofts would benefit from the same mitigation measures intended to reduce construction noise impacts at Santee Court Apartments, Textile Building Lofts would be projected to experience a construction -related noise increase of just 1.3 dBA Leq, similar to but less than the 1.6 dBA Leq impact that would occur at Santee Court Apartments. The noise impact at Textile Building Lofts would not exceed the 5 dBA noise increase threshold; in fact, it would not exceed the 3 dBA Leq threshold of perceptibility that represents when noise conditions may be noticeably louder." (AR 7229.) While Petitioner relies expert opinion to dispute and contradict the City's expert technical report, Petitioner has not demonstrated the City's expert studies are so "clearly inadequate or unsupported" as to be "entitled to no judicial deference." (See Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 409 fn.12. ["A clearly inadequate or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial deference."]) "When an agency is faced with conflicting evidence on an issue, it is permitted to give more weight to some of the evidence and to favor the opinions of some experts over others. (Association of Irritated Residents v. County of Madera (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1383, 1397.) Accordingly, Petitioner failed to meet its burden of demonstrating a prejudicial abuse of discretion related to the City's analysis of construction -related noise impacts. (See State Water Resources Control Bd. Cases (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 674, 795. ["The party challenging the EIR, however, bears the burden of demonstrating that the studies on which the EIR is based 'are clearly inadequate or unsupported."']) Page 17 of 21 2. Feasibility and Effectiveness of MM 1-1 and 1-2 Petitioner argues MM 1-1 and 1-2 are vague, ineffective and unenforceable. a. MM 1-1 "To ensure that the Project's construction -related noise levels do not exceed 75 dBA and that construction -related noise increases at Santee Court Apartments do not exceed S dBA," the City adopted MM 1-1. MM 1-1 provides "[a]II capable diesel -powered construction vehicles shall be equipped with exhaust mufflers or other suitable noise reduction devices." (AR 1011.) Petitioner contends MM 1-1 does not establish a performance standard because nothing in the mitigation measure sets a required noise level reduction. Petitioner argues muffler use alone does not ensure MM 1-1 will achieve any particular level of mitigation. Petitioner asserts "the fact that exhaust mufflers should or could reduce equipment noise by 3 dBA or more doesn't address the fact that the measure, as written, does not require mitigation at that level and therefore does not ensure that level of mitigation will be achieved, as is necessary to support the finding of no significant impacts from construction noise." (Opening Brief 28:18-22.) As noted earlier, "For projects for which an EIR has been prepared, where substantial evidence supports the approving agency's conclusion that mitigation measures will be effective, courts will uphold such measures against attacks based on their alleged inadequacy." (Sacramento Old City Assn. v. City Council, supra, 229 Cal.App.3d at 1027.) The City contends MM 1-1 as written will be effective. The use of mufflers to abate noise impacts is considered "best practices" and recommended under the City's CEQA threshold guide. (AR 2773, 2786-2787, 7299,10131-10132 [EPA's Office of Noise Abatement and Control Study], 10139.)21 In addition, the City's noise expert confirmed the use of mufflers as required by MM 1-1 would achieve a 3 dBA noise reduction. (AR 3085-3086, 10139-10140.) The expert explained "aftermarket mufflers reduce noise by over 3 dBA. (AR 10139.) In addition, the Project's MMRP requires the Flower Growers to retain an independent Construction Monitor, approved by the City, responsible for: (a) ensuring that "capable" mufflers are used during construction; and (b) documenting compliance. (AR 2848-2849.) While the court agrees MM 1-1 does not contain a specific performance standard, it does mandate the use of certain equipment that does have performance standards. Substantial evidence supports the City's conclusion the use of mufflers will be effective at reducing noise levels by at least 3 dBA. The City's noise expert reviewed aftermarket muffler manufacturer 21 The EPA study, upon which the City's CEClA Threshold Guide relies, shows that "equipment mufflers should reduce excavation and grading phase noise levels by 3 dBA. (AR 10131.) Page 18 of 21 Tania Flores From: Salvador Marquez Amezquita <samezquita@wscarpenters.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 7:31 PM To: Tania Flores Cc: Juan Munoz; Omar Cobian Subject: Travertine Specific Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged You don't often get email from samezquita@wscarpenters.org. Learn why this is important 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 Evening Planning Commission, My name is SalAmezquita I am a member and a Representative of the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, I represent 5,300 members 500 of them live in the Valley. I live, work and spend time in the city of La Quinta golfing, I Love your Cove and all the restaurants. I love hiking the local trails, and feel I will be impacted by the Environmental impact of this project. I as do the majority of the 500 members have to commute out of the city for work. Some of us have commutes to LA, Orange and San Diego Counties. I would like the city to require the Project be built with contractors that hire locally, pay prevailing wage and utilize apprentices from a state certified apprenticeship program. Workforce requirement help lower the construction -related environmental impacts while helping out local economy. I also wanted to mention that the zoom link and phone number didn't work. I attempted to zoom in from 5:10pm to 7:00pm and called multiple times without an answer. Respectfully, Salvador Amezquita Representative Western States Regional Council of Carpenters 951.533.8811 Download our app: Gooale Play I iTunes App Store Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Tania Flores From: Omar Cobian <OCobian@wscarpenters.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 8:00 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: Travertine Specific Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed You don't often get email from ocobian@wscarpenters.org. Learn why this is important 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 could you please forward to Planning Commissioners. Hello Planning Commissioners, My name is Omar Cobian and I am a Representative for the Carpenters Union, far to long many cities have allowed developers to build in their citywithout any community benefit during the construction. This project should require the Developers to hire local residents and to pay the area standard wages. The Youth of the Coachella area need opportunities to start their career in the trades close to home. As leaders of Coachella you have a responsibility to ensure that this project is built by responsible contractors and that this Developer pay the wages that people deserve for the hard work in the area. Carpenters from Local 951 have a living wage, Medical and a Pension that is paid by the contractors, in contrast the tax payer is subsidizing medical and social security for workers that are getting paid cash wages. I encourage you to place a condition of approval on for this development that requires skilled and trained Language and to use apprentichip language with a local hire component. Thank You, Get Outlook for iOS Omar Cobian Representative Western States Regional Council of Carpenters 909.501.1453 Download our app: Gooale Play I iTunes App Store Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Tania Flores From: Juan Munoz <jmunoz@wscarpenters.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 7:20 PM To: Tania Flores Subject: agenda 1 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged You don't often get email from jmunoz@wscarpenters.org. Learn why this is important 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 commissioners, your zoom link and telephone call in were not working. I was watching online and could hear you we just couldn't speak on it. My name is Juan Munoz and I represent close to 500 in the Coachella Valley more than half travel to Los Angeles, San Diego or Orange County for good paying jobs. The South Coast Air Quality Management District recently found that local hire requirements can result in air pollutant reductions. I'm not sure I heard anyone speak about vehicle pollution in the EIR and the amount of pollution construction travel would bring to our city. The truthfulness of the noise levels needs to be scrutinized a little closer no mention was made as they are coming down the apex. Will the truck driver be allowed to use their Jake Brake? We have qualified Coachella Valley carpenters that stand at the ready to build our local cities all we need is the opportunity but this project doesn't seem like its quite ready to move forward. Thak you for your time Juan Munoz Representative Western States Regional Council of Carpenters 213.216.5335 OCIMOM Download our app: Google Play I iTunes AQp Store Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.