*Club at Coral Mountain Resort - Draft EIR SCH# 2021020310 (June 2021)CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
DRAFT EIR
SCH# 2021020310
Applicant:
THE WAVE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
2440 Junction Place, Suite 200
Boulder, CO 80301
Lead Agency:
CITY OF LA QUINTA
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Preparer:
MSA CONSULTING INC.
34200 Bob Hope Drive
Rancho Mirage, California 92270
June 2021
L' J
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, 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
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Phone: 760-341-4455
Email: consultingplanner@laquintaca.gov
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
Derek Gallerani, Planning CAD Technician
Michael Rowe, Principal Engineer
LSA Associates, Inc.
901 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite B200
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Phone: 760-416-2075
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR i-1 June 2021
EIR PREPARERS
Jodi Ross -Borrego, Principal Biologist
Jill Carpenter, Senior Biologist/Bat Specialist
CRM Tech
1016 East Cooley Drive, Suite A/B
Colton, CA 92324
Phone: 909-824-6400
Bai "Tom" Tang, Principal Investigator/Historian
Michael Hogan, Principal Investigator
Deirdre Encarnacion, Archaeologist/Report Writer
Daniel Ballester, Archaeologist/Paleontological Surveyor/Field Director
Nina Gallardo, Archaeologist/Native American Liaison
Harry M. Quinn, Geologist/Paleontologist
Ben Kerridge, Paleontological Surveyor/Report Writer
Salvadore Z. Boites, Paleontological Surveyor
Hunter O'Donnell, Paleontological Surveyor
Michael D. Richards, MA, Registered Professional Archaeologist
Sabrina Fajardo, Paleontological Surveyor
Sladden Engineering
45090 Golf Center Parkway, Suite F
Indio, CA 92201
Phone: 760-863-0713
Matthew J. Cohrt, Project Geologist
Brett L. Anderson, Principal Engineer
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)
Alyssa Tamase (AQ Report)
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)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR i-2 June 2021
EIR PREPARERS
Musco Lighting
100 15t Avenue West
P.O. Box 808
Oskaloosa, IA 52577
Phone: 641-673-0411
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR i-3 June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
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 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1-6
1.4 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved 1-10
1.5 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-10
Chapter 2.0 Introduction 2-1
2.1 Purpose 2-1
2.2 Project History 2-2
2.3 Review of the Draft EIR 2-5
2.4 Scope of the EIR 2-6
2.5 Organization of the EIR 2-10
2.6 Reference Documents 2-14
Chapter 3.0 Project Description 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 Project Location 3-1
3.3 Surrounding Land Uses 3-5
3.4 Project Site History 3-6
3.5 Proposed Project 3-8
3.6 Specific Plan Planning Area 3-16
3.7 Circulation Plan 3-24
3.8 Infrastructure Plan 3-28
3.9 Project Implementation 3-34
3.10 Intended Uses of This EIR 3-34
3.11 Responsible Agencies 3-35
Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis 4-1
4.1 Introduction 4-1
4.2 Resource Categories Addressed in the EIR 4-1
4.3 Format of the EIR 4-1
Chapter 4.0 Sections
4.1 Aesthetics 4.1-1
4.2 Air Quality 4.2-1
4.3 Biological Resources 4.3-1
4.4 Cultural Resources 4.4-1
4.5 Energy Resources 4.5-1
4.6 Geology and Soils 4.6-1
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.7-1
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR i June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.8-1
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.9-1
4.10 Land Use and Planning 4.10-1
4.11 Noise 4.11-1
4.12 Public Services 4.12-1
4.13 Transportation 4.13-1
4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources 4.14-1
4.15 Utilities and Service Systems 4.15-1
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 5-3
5.4 Growth -Inducing Impacts 5-6
Chapter 6.0 Effects Found to have No Impact 6-1
6.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 6-1
6.2 Geology and Soils 6-3
6.3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 6-3
6.4 Land Use and Planning 6-4
6.5 Mineral Resources 6-4
6.6 Noise 6-5
6.7 Population and Housing 6-6
6.8 Recreation 6-7
6.9 Wildfire 6-8
Chapter 7.0 Alternatives 7-1
7.1 Introduction 7-1
7.2 Project Objectives 7-2
7.3 Alternatives Considered and Rejected 7-4
7.4 Alternatives Evaluated in Detail 7-5
7.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative 7-70
Chapter 8.0 References 8-1
Chapter 9.0 Glossary of Terms 9-1
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR ii June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables
Chapter 1.0
Table 1-1 Proposed Land Use Plan Summary 1-6
Table 1-2 Existing Land Use and Zoning Summary 1-11
Table 1-3 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-15
Chapter 2.0
Table 2-1 Specific Plan Summary 1988-2017 2-2
Chapter 3.0
Table 3-1 Specific Plan Summary 1988-2017 3-6
Table 3-2 Proposed Land Use Plan Summary 3-10
Table 3-3 Proposed Planning Area Summary 3-17
Chapter 4.0
Table 4.1-1 Development Standards Planning Area 1 4.1-8
Table 4.1-2 Development Standards Planning Area 11 4.1-9
Table 4.1-3 Development Standards Planning Area 111 4.1-10
Table 4.1-4 Development Standards Planning Area IV 4.1-11
Table 4.1-5 Proposed Zones and Building Heights 4.1-12
Table 4.1-6 PA 11 Development Standards Comparison 4.1-49
Table 4.1-7 PA 1 Development Standards Comparison 4.1-52
Table 4.1-8 PA 111 Development Standards Comparison 4.1-54
Table 4.1-9 Sub -Planning Area Distances from Rights -of -Way 4.1-55
Table 4.1-10 Sub -Planning Area Distances from Rights -of -Way 4.1-57
Table 4.1-11 PA IV Development Standards Comparison 4.1-58
Table 4.2-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status 4.2-8
Table 4.2-2 SCAQMD's Air Quality Significance Thresholds 4.2-13
Table 4.2-3 Construction Duration 4.2-20
Table 4.2-4 Construction Equipment Assumptions 4.2-21
Table 4.2-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Without Mitigation) 4.2-22
Table 4.2-6 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (With Mitigation) 4.2-23
Table 4.2-7 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions without PDFs 4.2-27
Table 4.2-8 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions with PDFs & Mitigation Measures 4.2-29
Table 4.2-9 Special Event Operational Activity without PDFs 4.2-30
Table 4.2-10 Special Event Operational Activity with PDFs & Mitigation 4.2-31
Table 4.2-11 Maximum Daily Localized Emissions Thresholds 4.2-37
Table 4.2-12 Localized Significance Summary of Construction without Mitigation 4.2-38
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR iii June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.2-13 Localized Significance Summary of Construction with Mitigation 4.2-39
Table 4.2-13 Localized Significance Summary of Phase 2 and Phase 3 Construction with
Mitigation 4.2-40
Table 4.5-1 Coral Mountain Resort Construction Duration 4.5-17
Table 4.5-2 Summary of Electricity Use During Construction 4.5-21
Table 4.5-3 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Worker Gasoline Demand 4.5-22
Table 4.5-4 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Vendor Diesel Fuel Demand 4.5-23
Table 4.5-5 Phase 1 Construction Hauling Diesel Demand 4.5-23
Table 4.5-6 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Equipment Diesel Demand 4.5-24
Table 4.5-7 Summary of Energy Use During Construction 4.5-25
Table 4.5-8 Project Electricity Demand With and Without PDFs 4.5-26
Table 4.5-9 Proposed Project Operational and Special Events Natural Gas Demand 4.5-28
Table 4.5-10 Proposed Project Operational VMT 4.5-30
Table 4.5-11 Proposed Project Operational Annual Petroleum 4.5-30
Table 4.5-12 Special Events Operational VMT 4.5-31
Table 4.5-13 Special Events Operational Annual Petroleum 4.5-31
Table 4.5-14 Summary of Annual Energy Use During Operation 4.5-33
Table 4.6-1 Closest Known Active Faults 4.6-3
Table 4.7-1 Construction Duration 4.7-14
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
4.7-2
4.7-3
4.7-4
4.7-5
4.7-6
4.7-7
4.7-8
4.7-9
4.9-1
4.9-2
4.10-1
4.10-2
4.10-3
4.10-4
4.10-5
4.10-6
4.10-7
4.11-1
Summary of Construction Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions 4.7-15
Project GHG Emissions without PDFs 4.7-17
Project GHG Emissions with PDFs 4.7-18
Special Events GHG Emissions without PDFs 4.7-18
Special Events GHG Emissions with PDFs 4.7-19
Project with Special Events GHG Emissions without PDFs 4.7-19
Project with Special Events GHG Emissions with Mitigation 4.7-20
Scoping Plan Consistency Summary 4.7-21
Summary of Drainage Areas and Retention Capacities 4.9-16
Coral Mountain Resort Estimated Project Water Service Demands for Residential,
Commercial, and Other Uses as Approved by CVWD 4.9-20
Surrounding Land Uses 4.10-2
Existing and Proposed Land Use 4.10-14
Existing and Proposed Zoning 4.10-14
PA I Development Standards 4.10-25
PA II Development Standards 4.10-26
PA III Development Standards 4.10-27
PA IV Development Standards 4.10-29
Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments 4.11-8
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR iv June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.11-2 Construction Standards 4.11-9
Table 4.11-3 Typical Noise Levels 4.11-10
Table 4.11-4 Noise Level Increase Perception 4.11-11
Table 4.11-5 Typical Levels of Ground -Borne Vibration 4.11-15
Table 4.11-6 Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receivers 4.11-18
Table 4.11-7 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment 4.11-19
Table 4.11-8 Significance Criteria Summary 4.11-21
Table 4.11-9 24 -Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements 4.11-24
Table 4.11-10 Off -Site Roadway Parameters 4.11-28
Table 4.11-11 Average Daily Traffic Volumes 4.11-29
Table 4.11-12 Time of Day Vehicle Splits 4.11-31
Table 4.11-13 Distribution of Traffic Flow by Vehicle Type (Vehicle Mix) 4.11-31
Table 4.11-14 On -Site Roadway Parameters 4.11-31
Table 4.11-15 Phase 1 Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary 4.11-33
Table 4.11-16 Phase 2 & 3 Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary 4.11-34
Table 4.11-17 EAC 2021 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts 4.11-37
Table 4.11-18 EAC 2023 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts 4.11-38
Table 4.11-19 EAC 2026 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts 4.11-40
Table 4.11-20 EAC 2026 Special Events Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts 4.11-41
Table 4.11-21 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels 4.11-42
Table 4.11-22 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels with Required Perimeter Wall 4.11-43
Table 4.11-23 Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) 4.11-44
Table 4.11-24 Reference Noise Level Measurements 4.11-45
Table 4.11-25 Daytime Project Operational Noise Levels 4.11-48
Table 4.11-26 Daytime Project Operational Noise Level Increases 4.11-49
Table 4.11-27 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels 4.11-51
Table 4.11-28 General Plan 2040 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts 4.11-53
Table 4.12-1 La Quinta Fire Station Locations 4.12-1
Table 4.12-2 La Quinta Police Station Locations 4.12-3
Table 4.12-3 CVUSD Schools within La Quinta 4.12-4
Table 4.12-4 Existing CVUSD School Capacity (2019/2020) 4.12-4
Table 4.12-5 Parks within the City of La Quinta 4.12-5
Table 4.12-6 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta 4.12-6
Table 4.12-7 Public Facilities within the City of La Quinta 4.12-6
Table 4.12-8 CVUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate 4.12-12
Table 4.13-1 Level of Service Description Mid -Link and Uninterrupted Flow 4.13-11
Table 4.13-2 Roadway Segment Capacity Thresholds 4.13-11
Table 4.13-3 Intersection ID and Location 4.13-13
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR v June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.13-4 Roadway Segments 4.13-13
Table 4.13-5 Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS 4.13-14
Table 4.13-6 Required Intersection Levels of Service 4.13-14
Table 4.13-7 Impact Criteria for Intersections Already Operating at LOS E or LOS F 4.13-14
Table 4.13-8 Intersection Analysis for Existing (2019) Conditions 4.13-16
Table 4.13-9 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for Existing (2019) Conditions 4.13-17
Table 4.13-10 Trip Generation Summary 4.13-18
Table 4.13-11 Phase 1 (2021) 4.13-19
Table 4.13-12 Phase 2 (2023) 4.13-20
Table 4.13-13 Project Buildout (2026) 4.13-21
Table 4.13-14 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Project (E+P) 4.13-25
Table 4.13-15 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for E+P Conditions 4.13-25
Table 4.13-16 E+P Fair Share Contributions 4.13-26
Table 4.13-17 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project (EAP) 4.13-27
Table 4.13-18 Project EAP Fair Share Contributions 4.13-28
Table 4.13-19 Intersection Analysis for Phase 1 Conditions (2021) Existing Plus Ambient Plus
Cumulative (EAPC) Without and With Project 4.13-31
Table 4.13-20 Project Phase 1 Fair Share Contributions 4.13-33
Table 4.13-21 Intersection Analysis for Phase 2 (2023) Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative
(EAPC) Without and With Project 4.13-35
Table 4.13-22 Project Phase 2 Fair Share Contributions 4.13-37
Table 4.13-23 Intersection Analysis for Phase 3 (2026) Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative
(EAPC) Without and With Project 4.13-39
Table 4.13-24 Project Phase 3 Fair Share Contributions 4.13-41
Table 4.13-25 Weekend Intersection Count Locations 4.13-42
Table 4.13-26 Weekend Special Event Trip Generation 4.13-43
Table 4.13-27 Intersection Analysis for EAPC Phase 3 (2026) Weekend Special Event Conditions
4.13-44
Table 4.13-28a Impacted Intersections during Weekend Events 4.13-45
Table 4.13-28b Project Access Turn Lane Storage Lengths for EAPC Phase 3 (2026) Weekend
Special Event Conditions 4.13-46
Table 4.13-29 Project Fair Share Percentages 4.13-51
Table 4.13-30 Project Service Population 4.13-53
Table 4.13-31 Baseline and Cumulative Project Residential Home -Based VMT 4.13-53
Table 4.13-32 Base Year Citywide Home -Based VMT 4.13-54
Table 4.13-33 Base Year Sub -Regional Link -Level VMT 4.13-56
Table 4.13-34 Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) without Project Conditions4.13-58
Table 4.13-35 Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) with Project Conditions 4.13-59
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR vi June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 4.13-36 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis for General Plan Buildout (2040) with Project
Conditions 4.13-60
Table 4.13-37 Project 2040 Fair Share Contributions 4.13-61
Table 4.15-1 Summary of Drainage Areas and Retention Capacities 4.15-19
Table 4.15-2 Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Conceptual Land Use Summary 4.15-26
Table 4.15-3 Estimated Project Water Service Demand for Residential, Commercial and Other
Uses 4.15-27
Table 4.15-4 Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AF) 4.15-27
Table 4.15-5 Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AF) — Urban Supply Only4.15-28
Table 4.15-6 Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison (AF) —
Urban Supply Only 4.15-28
Table 4.15-7 Estimated Project Water Service Demand for Existing Specific Plan Land Uses
4.15-29
Table 4.15-8 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply 4.15-29
Table 4.15-9 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply 4.15-31
Table 4.15-10 Solid Waste Generation 4.15-33
Table 4.15-11 La Quinta General Plan Buildout Solid Waste Generation 4.15-36
Chapter 7.0
Table 7-1 Existing Land Use and Zoning Summary 7-15
Table 7-2 Alternative 2 Trip Generation Comparison 7-25
Table 7-3 Alternative 3 Trip Generation Comparison 7-40
Table 7-4 Alternative 4 Trip Generation Comparison 7-53
Table 7-5 Alternative 5 Trip Generation Comparison 7-66
Table 7-6 Comparison of Alternatives and Project 7-72
List of Exhibits
Chapter 1.0
Exhibit 1-1 Existing Site Conditions 1-3
Exhibit 1-2 Proposed Land Use Areas 1-8
Chapter 3.0
Exhibit 3-1 Regional Location Map 3-2
Exhibit 3-2 Vicinity Map 3-3
Exhibit 3-3 Site Location Map 3-4
Exhibit 3-4 Existing General Plan Land Use Map 3-7
Exhibit 3-5 Proposed General Plan Land Use Map 3-14
Exhibit 3-6 Proposed Zoning Map 3-15
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR vii June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Exhibit 3-7 Planning Area Land Map 3-16
Exhibit 3-8 Conceptual Development Plan 3-24
Exhibit 3-9 Circulation Plan 3-27
Exhibit 3-10 Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan 3-28
Exhibit 3-11 Conceptual Water Plan 3-30
Exhibit 3-12 Conceptual Sewer Plan 3-31
Exhibit 3-13 Conceptual Drainage Plan 3-33
Exhibit 3-14 Off -Site Electrical Improvements 3-34
Chapter 4.0
Exhibit 4.1-1 Planning Area Land Use Plan 4.1-14
Exhibit 4.1-2 Vehicular Circulation Plan 4.1-15
Exhibit 4.1-3 Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan 4.1-16
Exhibit 4.1-4 Line of Sight Section "A": View from Avenue 58 4.1-29
Exhibit 4.1-5 Visual Simulation Viewpoint "A": View from Avenue 58 4.1-30
Exhibit 4.1-6 Line of Sight Section "B": View from Lion's Gate 4.1-31
Exhibit 4.1-7 Visual Simulation Viewpoint "B": View from Lion's Gate 4.1-32
Exhibit 4.1-8 Line of Sight Section "C": View from Andalusia Entry 4.1-33
Exhibit 4.1-9 Visual Simulation Viewpoint "C": View from Andalusia Entry 4.1-34
Exhibit 4.1-10 Line of Sight Section "D": View from Madison Street 4.1-35
Exhibit 4.1-11 Visual Simulation Viewpoint "D": View from Madison Street 4.1-36
Exhibit 4.1-12 Line of Sight Section "E": View from Avenue 60 4.1-37
Exhibit 4.1-13 Visual Simulation Viewpoint "E": View from Avenue 60 4.1-38
Exhibit 4.1-14 Light Orientation 4.1-65
Exhibit 4.1-15 Lighting Analysis Horizontal (Foot -Candle) 4.1-66
Exhibit 4.1-16 Lighting Analysis Vertical (Foot -Candle) 4.1-67
Exhibit 4.1-17 Photometric Overlay 4.1-68
Exhibit 4.1-18 Projected Glare 4.1-69
Exhibit 4.1-19 Projected Glare Overlay 4.1-70
Exhibit 4.2-2 Sensitive Receptor Locations 4.2-35
Exhibit 4.3-1 Locations of Suitable Roosting Habitat 4.3-20
Exhibit 4.9-1 Proposed Drainage Areas and Retention Facilities 4.9-15
Exhibit 4.10-1 Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations 4.10-5
Exhibit 4.10-2 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations 4.10-8
Exhibit 4.11-1 Noise Measurement Locations 4.11-3
Exhibit 4.11-2 Noise Source and Receiver Locations 4.11-24
Exhibit 4.13-1 TIA Study Area 4.13-4
Exhibit 4.13-2 Project Residential and Resort External Trip Distribution 4.13-22
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR viii June 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Exhibit 4.13-3 Project Shopping Center External Trip Distribution 4.13-23
Exhibit 4.13-4 Schedule of Special Event Operation Planning 4.13-49
Exhibit 4.15-1 Conceptual Water Plan 4.15-24
Exhibit 4.15-2 Conceptual Sewer Plan 4.15-25
List of Appendices
Appendix A Notice of Preparation and Public Comment Letters
Appendix B Lighting Analysis
Appendix C Air Quality Report
Appendix D.1 Biological Report
Appendix D.2 Focused Bat Survey
Appendix E Cultural Report
Appendix F ACBCI Tribal Mitigation Letter
Appendix G Geotechnical Report
Appendix H Paleontological Report
Appendix I Greenhouse Gas Report
Appendix J.1 Preliminary Hydrology Report
Appendix J.2 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix J.3 Master Plan Hydrology Report
Appendix K.1 Noise Study
Appendix K.2 Noise Memorandum
Appendix L.1 Traffic Report
Appendix L.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation
Appendix M Coral Mountain Specific Plan Final Water Supply Assessment and Revision Letter
Appendix N Coral Mountain Alternatives —Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison
Appendix 0 Alternatives Water and Energy Comparisons
Coral Mountain Retreat Draft EIR ix June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chapter 1.0 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 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Executive Summary
shall: 1) contain a brief summary of the proposed action; 2) identify each significant effect with
proposed mitigation measures that would reduce or avoid that effect; 3) identify alternatives that
were designed to reduce or avoid identified significant effects; 4) identify areas of controversy known
to the Lead Agency including issues raised by agencies and the public; and 5), identify issues to be
resolved including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the significant
effects.
1.2 Summary of the Proposed Action
1.2.1 Proposed Project
Existing Conditions
The project site encompasses approximately 929 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of La
Quinta, established as "Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan 03-067" (SP 03-067). SP 03-067
occupies the area south of Avenue 58, north of Avenue 60, and east and west of Madison Street. The
existing local area is characterized by developed golf course and residential communities to the north,
west, east, and southeast, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south, Monroe Street and
vacant and agricultural lands to the east, and open space and the Coachella Valley Water District
(CVWD) facilities (i.e., Dike No. 4 and percolation ponds) to the south. In addition to the Santa Rosa
Mountains, a portion of Coral Mountain is situated within the southwest portion of the project
p roperty.
SP 03-067 is characterized by developed an undeveloped land separated by Madison Street. The area
east of Madison Street encompasses the Andalusia Country Club property, and the area west of
Madison Street is currently vacant. Andalusia Country Club is currently being developed and includes
residential units, a clubhouse facility and golf course.
The approximately 386 -acres west of Madison Street are primarily characterized by vacant and
previously disturbed land with desert vegetation of varying heights and densities. The site has been
subject to previous development and uses including agricultural and residential land uses, dirt roads
and hiking trails. A historic period adobe house, residential and agricultural building remnants, along
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
with the concrete pads and footings are located near the center of this portion of the project area.
The adobe residential use is abandoned and partially collapsed, and the residential and agricultural
buildings have been previously demolished. The site has been cleared and graded of agricultural
vegetation. Exhibit 1-1, Existing Site Conditions, displays an aerial image of the project site's current
condition.
As previously stated, the area east of Madison Street is partially developed as Andalusia Country Club,
under Specific Plan 03-067. Andalusia Country Club, as previously stated, is being developed as a
residential and golf community, and will not change as a result of the proposed project. Meanwhile,
the project area west of Madison Street, is the subject of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change,
new Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Permit, and Development Agreement
proposed for the project and discussed in greater detail below. General Plan land use designations
surrounding the Coral Mountain Resort project area include Open Space — Natural to the west and
southwest and Low -Density Residential land uses to the north, south and east. Existing residential
communities occur to the north, south, and east. Avenue 58 and residential properties define the
project's northern boundary; Madison Street and the Andalusia community define the eastern
boundary; Coral Mountain defines the property's southwestern boundary; and vacant land and
residential properties define the southern and western boundaries.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-2 June 2021
,,mo=w:* ;.
MSA CONSULTING, INC
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
> PLANNING> CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed Project
The project currently occupies approximately 929 acres south of Avenue 58 and east and west of
Madison Street. Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067 is being processed to remove the area west of
Madison Street from Specific Plan 03-067, thus creating two separate and distinct communities,
"Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and "Andalusia Country Club", east of Madison
Street. The amendment to Specific Plan 03-067 serves only to remove the westerly 386 acres. The
Specific Plan will remain intact for the easterly 543 acres, and development of Andalusia is expected
to continue as currently permitted.
With the separation of the westerly 386 acres west of Madison Street, the applicant is also requesting
approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002), Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004), Specific Plan
(SP 2020-0002), Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2019-0005), Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001),
and Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002), as a part of the entitlement process. A brief summary
of the proposed entitlements is provided below. Please consult Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for
an in-depth discussion of the project's entitlements.
General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002) will amend the current General Plan land use
designations from General Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Open Space — Recreation to
Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space —
Recreation.
Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004) will revise the existing zoning from Neighborhood Commercial, Low
Density Residential, and Golf Course, to Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL),
Parks and Recreation (PR), and Tourist Commercial (CT).
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) will establish a new master plan governing
the allowable land uses, design guidelines, and development standards to allow creation of a
boutique resort and master -planned community. The Specific Plan includes four Planning Areas which
are coterminous to the General Plan and Zoning designation boundaries described above.
Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2019-0005) subdivides the property into smaller lots for development. The
TTM will subdivide all of Planning Area III (PA III) and the western corner of PA II into lots suitable for
the development of the uses permitted for these areas in the Specific Plan. Future TTMs may be filed
with each phase of development as necessary to implement the balance of the project.
Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001) is required by the City for final approval of landscape
design, architectural design, and site plan for the Wave Basin along with associated mechanical
equipment and improvements (Planning Area III -B). Future SDPs will be filed with each phase of
development as necessary to implement the balance of the project.
Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002) would vest the applicant's right to develop the Coral
Mountain Resort Specific Plan area pursuant to the entitlements described above, address short-term
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-4 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
rentals within all planning areas of the project, ensure that the project has a net positive fiscal impact
on the City despite the lack of property tax revenue to the City through 2035, and ensure the timely
completion of infrastructure to serve the project and surrounding area, and ensure that the project
design features and mitigation measures identified in this EIR are enforceable by the City as project
requirements.
Project Planning Areas
The project, under SP 2020-0002, will result in a variety of land uses including Low Density Residential,
Tourist Commercial, General Commercial, and Open Space Recreation. Low Density Residential land
uses will occupy approximately 232.3 acres and result in a maximum of 496 dwelling units. Tourist
Commercial land uses will result in a 16.62 -acre artificial Wave Basin, 104 dwelling units, 150 hotel
rooms, and 57,000 square feet of private resort -serving commercial uses available to residents and
hotel guests, on approximately 120.8 acres. General Commercial land uses will occupy approximately
7.7 acres with up to 60,000 square feet of retail commercial uses available to the general public. Open
Space Recreation land uses will occur on approximately 23.6 acres in the southwest portion of the
site.
The Planning Areas are discussed briefly below, and illustrated in Exhibit 1-2 (Proposed Land Use
Areas). Please consult Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for an in-depth discussion of the project's
Planning Areas.
Planning Area 1 (PA I) — Neighborhood Commercial is located on 7.7 acres at the southwest corner of
Avenue 58 and Madison Street, and allows for the construction of 60,000 square feet of publicly
accessible neighborhood commercial building space with affiliated circulation and infrastructure
improvements.
Planning Area II (PA II) — Low Density Residential is located on approximately 232.3 acres on the
northern and eastern portions of the project and allows for the construction of up to 496 single-family
attached and detached dwellings.
Planning Area III (PA III) — Tourist Commercial is located on approximately 120.8 acres and will allow
the construction of a mixed-use private resort including an approximately 16.62 -acre surf Wave Basin,
a boutique hotel, a walkable residential village, an entertainment and fitness complex, and a private
community clubhouse. The resort will contain 150 hotel keys, 104 residential units, and 57,000 square
feet of resort -serving commercial and recreational building space, outdoor amenities, and a
community clubhouse. The Tourist Commercial Planning Area is divided into seven planning subareas
(A through G) listed below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-5 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PA III -A — Resort Hotel: Located on approximately 8.5 acres will accommodate a boutique resort
hotel with up to 150 keys along with customary resort amenities such as eateries/cafes, retail
shops, meeting space, swimming pool, fitness center, spa, and lodging.
PA III -B —The Wave: The Wave subarea contains approximately 31.2 acres containing an artificial
surf Wave Basin and associated infrastructure.
PA III -C — Wave Club: The Wave Club subarea contains approximately 3.2 acres fronting the
Wave Basin and will function as a private clubhouse with amenities for exclusive use by the Coral
Mountain community.
PA III -D, PA III -E — Resort Residential West and East: These planning subareas contain
approximately 40.5 acres and will consist of 104 residential units.
PA III-F—The Farm: The Farm contains approximately 11 acres of land for construction of private
resort -serving entertainment and fitness facilities (i.e., golf, golf practice and training facilities,
hiking, biking, bicycle pump -track, fitness areas, and swimming pool areas).
PA III -G — Back of House: The Back of House subarea contains approximately 26.5 acres that will
be graded as level, largely open land south of the Wave Basin. This subarea will provide
unprogrammed gathering and staging space for temporary equipment such as port -a -potties,
shade structures, tenting for inclement weather, and catering equipment that might be used
during events.
Planning Area IV (PA IV) — Open Space is located on approximately 23.6 acres of natural open space
that may be used for low -impact active and passive recreation activities such as hiking, biking and
ropes courses.
Table 1-1, Proposed Land Use Plan Summary, provides a summary of the proposed land uses. While
Exhibit 1-3, Conceptual Site Conditions, illustrates the proposed land uses.
Table 1-1 Proposed Land Use Summary
Planning Area
(PA)
Land Use
Category
Gross Land
Area (Acres)
Non -Residential
Building (SF)
Max. Dwelling
Units (DU)
Max. Hotel/Resort
Units (DU)
PA 1
GC
7.7
60,0001
PA II
LDR
232.3
496
PA III
TC
120.8
57,0002
104
150
PA IV
OS -R
23.6
Right of Way
1.5
Total
385.9
117,000
600
150
Note: GC = General Commercial LDR = Low Density Residential, TC = Tourist Commercial OS -R = Open Space
Recreation
1. Consisting of retail commercial uses available to the general public.
2. Consisting of private resort -serving uses available only to residents and hotel guests.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 1-6
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project also proposes special events associated with the Wave Basin. These events may occur up
to 4 times per year and are restricted to 4 days duration with attendance by a maximum of 2,500
guests per day. Prior to any events taking place, the applicant will be required to process and receive
approval for Temporary Use Permit(s).
In addition to the proposed onsite development, project implementation will also include the
installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58,
approximately 0.60 miles northeast of the project site, and associated conduit in Avenue 58 to bring
sufficient power to the project site. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in
the existing right-of-way.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-7 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
Planning Area Boundary
- — — — -
Planning Area Sub -Boundary
Neighborhood Commercial
Low Density Residential
Resort
Open Space (Recreation)
■ ■
AVENUE 58
MI . - .. _ ■ ■ - . ■
1
■
1
■
$ y
PA II
LOW DENSITY O
RESIDENTIAL *Z
■
■
I
•
PA I
OPEN SP
PA II
..
CE
..
..
•
AVENUE 60
•
iI
1.
`N
m
■-1
i
■
i
■
1
i
•
•
i
N.T.S.
EXHIBIT
MSA CONSULTING, INC. / '[ PROPOSED LAND USE AREAS
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
1.2
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.2.2 Implementing Actions / Other Approvals Associated with 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. This EIR has been prepared as a Project EIR that will be used
by the City as part of its consideration of all components of the project. Other responsible or trustee
agencies may also use the EIR in their consideration of permitting of development within the project
site. These include but are not limited to Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Imperial Irrigation
District (IID), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
The City of La Quinta is the lead agency under CEQA and has the principal approval authority over the
proposed project, the following implementing actions and approvals are required by the City:
• Certification of the EIR (EIR 2021020310)
• Adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002)
• Adoption of a Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004)
• Approval of the Specific Plan Amendment (SP 2019-0003, Amendment V to SP 03-067)
• Adoption of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002)
• Approval of a Tentative Tract Map 37815 (TTM 2019-0005)
• Approval of Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001)
• Approval of a Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002)
In addition, the proposed project will require approval of the following plans:
• 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).
• South Coast Air Quality Management District
o PM -10 Plan for compliance with Rule 403.1; Dust Control in the Coachella Valley.
• Riverside County Department of Environmental Health
o Plans for Wave Basin prior to construction for compliance with Title 22 of the California
Code of Regulations.
o Hazardous Materials Business Plan and permit for compliance with Chapter 6.5 California
Health and Safety Code.
1.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project
This EIR has considered and evaluated alternatives to the proposed project pursuant to the provisions
of Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended. Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA
Guidelines states that:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-9 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
"An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or the location of the
project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid
or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative
merits of the alternatives. An EIR needs to not consider every conceivable alternative to a
project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will
foster informed decision making and public participation. There is no ironclad rule governing
the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason."
State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126.6 (b) through (f) identifies the key considerations pertaining
to, and requirements for, the preparation of the alternatives analysis in an EIR.
1,3.1 Alternatives Considered for Evaluation
Five alternatives to the Coral Mountain Resort project were considered for evaluation and compared
to the proposed project. The following provides a summary of the Alternatives. Analysis of the
impacts associated with each Alternative is provided in Chapter 7, Alternatives of the EIR.
Alternative 1: No Project/No Build
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 (e) the analysis of alternatives must include the specific
alternative of "No Project." The purpose of describing and analyzing a No Project alternative is to
allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of
not approving the proposed project. Under the No Project/No Build Alternative ("Alternative 1"), the
project would remain in its current and existing vacant condition. The existing visual character and
visual resources would remain the same, and none of the significant impacts of the project would
occur. However, the project site remaining in its existing condition is not considered the most likely
outcome if the proposed project is not approved, due to the existing entitlements associated with SP
03-067, which would remain in effect if the project is disapproved. Accordingly, this Alternative will
be discussed briefly in the Draft EIR, but it will not be analyzed in detail.
Alternative 2: No Project/Existing Entitlements
Under the No Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative ("Alternative 2"), the 386 -acre portion of the
project would not be developed, and instead, the project site would be developed according to its
existing entitlements. Currently, the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067), as
amended, allows General Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Open Space (Recreation) uses.
The existing zoning designations are Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL),
and Golf Course (GC). Under SP 03-067 the property would develop approximately 8.4 acres of
commercial use at the southwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58, 204.2 acres of low-density
residential uses, and 171.9 acres for golf course use, as shown in the table, below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-10 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table 1-2 Existing Land Use and Zoning Summary
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning
Acres
General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
8.4
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential (RL)
204.2
Open Space (Recreation)
Golf Course (GC)
171.9
Total
384.5 acres
Implementation of Alternative 2 would include the development of 750 low density residential units,
171.9 acres of golf use, and 60,000 square feet of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the
property. It is anticipated that the golf course would be privately owned and would be operated as a
resort -style course that is available to the public to play on a daily fee basis to ensure economic
viability.
Alternative 3: Reduced Density Alternative
Under the Reduced Density Alternative ("Alternative 3"), the project would be reduced by one-third
of the proposed density of the project. Therefore, this Reduced Density Alternative would develop
400 residential dwelling units, 100 resort/hotel rooms, 38,000 square feet of resort commercial uses,
and 40,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses. The Wave Basin and other proposed
recreational amenities would remain part of the project as presently proposed. The project would
require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, new Specific Plan,
Tentative Tract Map(s), Site Development Permits, and Development Agreement, similar to the
proposed project.
Alternative 4: The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative
Under the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative ("Alternative 4"), the project would be developed with a
resort hotel of 150 hotel rooms and associated recreational, restaurant and retail amenities, an 18 -
hole championship golf course that would be open to the public to play on a daily fee basis, and 600
low-density residential units. Although Alternative 4 would be consistent with the golf and residential
uses allowed under the existing entitlements, the project is assumed to require a General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, and new Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map(s)
and Site Development Permits to allow the hotel use.
Alternative 5: The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative
Under the Lake Amenity Alternative ("Alternative 5"), the project would be developed with a lake
amenity instead of the wave basin, and would include 7501°w -density residential units and 8.4 acres
of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property, consistent with the existing entitlements
for the project site. The lake would be approximately 75 acres, and would be used for typical lake
uses, including small electric boats, sailing, kayaking and paddle boarding (but not gas -powered boats
or recreational watercraft). This alternative would not have the hotel or other Tourist Commercial
uses.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-11 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Although Alternative 5 would be consistent with the existing residential and commercial uses allowed
under the existing entitlements, the project is assumed to require a General Plan Amendment, Zone
Change, Specific Plan Amendment, new Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map(s) and Site Development
Permits to allow the recreational lake use.
A full discussion and analysis of the alternatives compared to the proposed project is included in
Chapter 7.0, Alternatives. Table 7-6, Comparison of Alternatives and Project, in Chapter 7.0,
provides a summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives.
1.4 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). Comments received from area residents during the circulation
period identified concerns regarding aesthetics, air quality, water resources, noise, and traffic. The
topics, and their associated mitigation, if necessary, are briefly discussed below. All other related
potential impacts resulting from the project have been addressed throughout this Draft EIR.
Aesthetics
Concerns regarding aesthetic resources, including scenic viewsheds, scenic resources, building
heights, and lighting impacts are discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics. The proposed development
standards, design guidelines, architecture, and landscape plans for the project are outlined in the new
Specific Plan (SP2020-0002). Concerns raised in the NOP process included the obstruction of
mountain views, including both the Santa Rosa Mountains and Coral Mountain; the potential for a
significant change in the visual character of the area from a single -story residential and golf
environment to a hotel and Wave Basin facility; and the potential impacts of proposed 80 -foot light
standards surrounding the Wave Basin on the night sky, light and glare. Visual simulations, line -of -
sight analyses and photometric analyses were conducted for the project and are described in Section
4.1, Aesthetics.
Air Quality
Concerns regarding air quality have been addressed in Section 4.2, Air Quality. Concerns raised in the
NOP process included the reduced air quality, due to the increased traffic during construction and
operation of the project; pollution from the project; and dust emitted from the project site during
construction -related activities. A project -specific Air Quality Report was consulted to analyze the
project's impacts on air quality during construction and operation of the project. The findings are
provided in Section 4.2, Air Quality.
Water Resources
Project impacts to water resources are discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, and
Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems. Concerns raised in the NOP process included the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-12 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
consumption of water for the operation of the approximately 16 -acre Wave Basin, as well as concerns
for future groundwater supply. The project -specific Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply
Verification (Appendix M), hydrology reports (Appendix J.1 and J.3), and Water Quality Management
Plan (Appendix J.2) were consulted during the analysis of the project's impacts on water resources
and future supply of the service area. This is described in Sections 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality,
and 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems.
Noise
Noise impacts during construction and operation of the proposed project are discussed in Section
4.11, Noise. Concerns raised in the NOP process included the potential impacts of noise generated by
the Wave Basin and associated machinery/facilities, such as the loudspeaker announcing the wave;
noise generated by the project echoing off Coral Mountain; construction -related noise; and noise
generated during the proposed events to the residential areas surrounding the project. A project -
specific Noise Study (Appendix K.1) was conducted to determine the construction and operational
noise impacts generated by project -related activities. Additionally, a Noise Memorandum (Appendix
K.2) was also provided to confirm and further clarify the findings in the Noise Study. This is described
in Section 4.11, Noise.
Transportation
Project -related impacts to traffic and transportation are analyzed in Section 4.13, Transportation.
The proposed vehicular and non -vehicular circulation plans proposed for the project are also briefly
discussed in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, and the new Specific Plan (SP2020-0002). Concerns
raised in the NOP process included the potential for a significant increase in traffic generated during
project -related construction activities; potential increase of traffic as a result of the resort use and
allowance of short term rentals at the project; significant traffic during the proposed special events
at the project site; and the potential degradation of roads in the surrounding area due to the
increased traffic. A project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix L.1) and a Vehicle Miles Traveled
Evaluation (Appendix L.2) were provided to analyze the impacts of project -related traffic generated
during construction and operation of the proposed project. The findings and analysis are outlined in
Section 4.13, Transportation.
Issues to be Resolved
As stated above, public concerns of the proposed project involved potential impacts to aesthetics, air
quality, noise, water resources, and transportation. All of the substantive environmental issues raised
by the public have been addressed and otherwise considered during preparation of 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 aesthetics and greenhouse gas
emissions were identified. Mitigation measures would reduce aesthetic impacts and project -
generated greenhouse gas emissions to the greatest extent feasible, but project -specific impacts
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-13 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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.
The choice of alternatives is summarized in Section 1.3, Summary of Alternatives. Of the Alternatives
considered in this Draft EIR section, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in no impacts to
the project site. However, it is not likely that development will not occur at the project site since the
project site is currently included in the SP 03-067, and is entitled under SP 03-067 to be developed as
a low density residential and golf community with neighborhood commercial uses in the northeast
corner. The impact of the existing entitled property is analyzed in Alternative 2, No Project/Existing
Entitlements. 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 7-3, Comparison of Alternatives and Project.
1.5 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
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 the maximum extent feasible, 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-14 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table 1-3 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potential Impacts on
the Environment
Mitigation Measure
Level of Significance
after Mitigation
4.1 Aesthetics
a. Adverse effect on scenic vistas
b. Impact a Scenic Highway (No
Impact)
c. Degradation to the visual
character or quality of the site
d. Light and glare
Mitigation Measures
AES -1 The perimeter walls around the low density residential planning areas shall
be setback from the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by
a minimum average of 30 feet (10 feet more than required under the
LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review and approval of
final perimeter wall and landscape plans to reduce impacts to existing
views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
AES -2 All residential structures shall be setback by a minimum of 75 feet from
the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way to reduce impacts
to existing views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
AES -3 The operation of the Wave Basin will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 10:00 p.m., and the lighting will only be permitted between dusk and
10:00 p.m. to ensure compliance with the City's outdoor lighting
requirements (LQMC 9.100.150).
Significant and
Unavoidable
4.2 Air Quality
a. Conflict with implementation of
applicable air quality plan
b. Violate air quality standard or
contribute substantially to
existing violation
c. Cumulatively considerable net
increase if any criteria pollutant
d. Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Mitigation Measures
Construction -Source Mitigation Measures
AQ -1: During Phase 1 of construction, the paving installation activity shall not
overlap with the architectural coating (building painting) activity. That
prohibition shall be included on all building plans.
AQ -2: For equipment greater than 150 horsepower (>150 HP), the Construction
Contractor shall ensure that off-road diesel construction equipment that
complies with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-15
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
e. Create objectionable odors
Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 emissions standards and shall ensure that
all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer's specifications.
Operational -Source Mitigation Measures
AQ -3: The project will require the use of low VOC paints for re -painting and
maintenance of exterior structures consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113(not
to exceed 50 grams per liter VOCs for interior and exterior building
envelope re -painting). Under federal and state law, SCAQMD is under a
legal obligation to enforce air pollution regulations. These regulations are
primarily meant to ensure that the surrounding (or ambient) air meets
federal and state air quality standards. The South Coast AQMD also has
broad authority to regulate toxic and hazardous air emissions, and these
regulations are enforced in the same manner as those which pertain to the
ambient air quality standards.
Standard Regulatory Requirements/Best Available Control Measures
Measures listed below (or equivalent language) shall appear on all project grading
plans, construction specifications and bid documents, and the City shall ensure
such language is incorporated prior to issuance of any development permits. South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules that are currently
applicable during construction activity for this project include but are not limited
to Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). It should be
noted that these Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) are standard regulatory
requirements.
BACM AQ -1: The contractor shall adhere to applicable measures contained in Table
1 of Rule 403 including, but not limited to:
• All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease
when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit
fugitive dust emissions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-16
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-17
June 2021
• The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and
disturbed areas within the project are watered at least three (3) times
daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of
disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the
mid-morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day.
• The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and
Project site areas are limited to 15 miles per hour or less.
BACM AQ -2: The following measures shall be incorporated into project plans and
specifications as implementation of SCAQMD Rule 1113 (3):
• Only "Low -Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)" paints (no more than
50 gram/liter (g/L) of VOC) consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113 shall be
used.
BACM AQ -3: The project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which
prohibits the use of wood burning stoves and fireplaces in new
development.
4.3 Biological Resources
a. Candidate, sensitive or special
status species
Mitigation Measures
Less than Significant
BIO -1: A burrowing owl clearance survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist
b. Riparian habitat
not more than 30 days prior to any site disturbance (grubbing, grading, and
c. Federally protected wetlands (No
construction). The pre -construction survey is required to use accepted
Impact)
protocol (as determined CDFW). Prior to construction, a qualified biologist
d. Movement of wildlife (No Impact)
will survey the construction area and an area up to 500 feet outside the
project limits for burrows that could be used by burrowing owls. If the
e. Conflict with local policies (No
burrow is determined to be occupied, the burrow will be flagged, and a
Impact)
160 -foot diameter buffer will be established during non -breeding season
f. Conflict with applicable habitat
or a 250 -foot diameter buffer during the breeding season. The buffer area
conservation plan (No Impact)
will be staked and flagged. No development activities will be permitted
within the buffer until the young are no longer dependent on the burrow.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-17
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow will be made inaccessible to owls,
and construction may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is
occupied, owls shall be relocated pursuant to accepted Wildlife Agency
protocols. 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.
BIO -2: In June 2021, a qualified bat biologist will conduct a second round of focused
nighttime surveys for roosting bats at locations where suitable roosting
habitat is identified. The nighttime survey will include a combination of
acoustic and exit count methods, and will take place during the bat
maternity season (March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley) to enable
detection of maternity -roosting bats. If maternity roosts are identified
within the project area, the biologist will coordinate with CDFW to
implement avoidance measures during the bat maternity season in
accordance with CDFW's established standards. No construction activities
will occur within a 300 -foot buffer of maternity roost sites during the bat
maternity season unless concurrence is received from CDFW to reduce that
buffer distance based upon the bat species present and the activities
occurring.
BIO -3: Removal of trees (including palm trees) shall occur outside the bat
maternity season (March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley), which
coincides with the bird nesting season, to avoid the potential for "take" of
flightless young. Trees and snags that have been identified as confirmed or
potential roost sites require a two-step removal process and the
involvement of a bat biologist to ensure that no roosting bats are killed
during this activity. Consistent with CDFW protocols this two-step removal
shall occur over two consecutive days as follows: on Day 1, branches and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-18
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
limbs not containing cavities, as identified by a qualified bat biologist, will
be removed. On Day 2, the remainder of the tree may be removed without
supervision by a bat biologist. The disturbance caused by limb removal,
followed by an interval of one evening, will allow bats to safely abandon
the roost.
BIO -4: Although no construction will occur at the rock outcrops where occupied
bat roosts were identified, bats roosting in that area could be subject to
potential adverse effects from project -related light overspill. To avoid
permanent impacts to roosting bats (including maternity -roosting bats)
from the installation of new light fixtures associated with the proposed
development, all lighting fixtures shall have light shields or similar devices
(e.g., dark sky compliant lighting) installed to ensure that there will be no
perceived light overspill onto Coral Mountain, which shall be demonstrated
by a supplemental light study approved by the project biologist and
provided to the City prior to issuance of any permit for occupancy or use
of the Wave Basin.
BIO -5: A qualified bat biologist shall confirm the absence of roosting bats prior to
any restoration work or other disturbance of the adobe site. If bats are
found or if the absence of bats cannot be confirmed, the bat biologist will
install or directly supervise installation of humane eviction devices and
exclusionary material to prevent bats from roosting in the building.
Implementation of the humane eviction/exclusions is typically performed
in the fall (September or October) preceding construction activity at each
structure to avoid impacts to hibernating bats during the winter months or
during the maternity season (March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley),
when nonvolant (flightless) young are present. Any humane
eviction/exclusion devices must be installed at least 10 days prior to the
demolition of a structure housing bats to allow sufficient time for the bats
to vacate the roost(s).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-19
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BIO -6: To ensure compliance with California Fish and Game Code and the MBTA
and to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds, vegetation removal
activities shall be conducted outside the general bird nesting season
(January 15 through August 31). Any vegetation removal and/or
construction activities that occur during the nesting season will require
that all suitable habitats be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of
nesting birds by a qualified biologist. Prior to commencement of clearing,
a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys within 14 days
and repeated 3 days prior to ground -disturbing activities. If any active nests
are detected a buffer of 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) around the nest
adjacent to construction will be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the
nesting cycle is complete. The buffer may be modified and/or other
recommendations proposed as determined appropriate by the biologist to
minimize impacts.
4.4 Cultural Resources
a. Adverse change to Historical
Resources
b. Adverse change to Archaeological
Resources
c. Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries (No Impact)
Mitigation Measures
CUL -1: A comprehensive recordation program shall be prepared by a qualified
archaeologist for Site 33-008388. The program shall contain detailed
drawings and measurements to preserve the information on the adobe
building. Such information would include the floor plan, elevations,
building materials and their configurations, and any other notable
structural and architectural details. The adobe remains and an
appropriate buffer determined by the project archaeologist shall be
flagged and cornered off during all ground disturbance and preserved in
place. Prior to the occupancy of any structure in Planning Area II, the
adobe will be fenced off and an informational plaque describing the
history of the ranch complex shall be provided, and the project proponent
shall provide the City with the CC&Rs for the project area, demonstrating
that the feature would be maintained in perpetuity by the project's
Homeowners Association. Special attention should be given to the
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-20
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
residence foundation, which, may be the remains of one of the earlier
structures at the site, dating from 1920s or before. The footings and slabs
at this location should be cleared and measured, and attempts should be
made to locate the original trash pits or privies which could contain
valuable artifacts revealing much about life in the harsh environment at
such an early date. The scatter of artifacts has the greatest number of pre -
1925 artifacts, mostly in the form of sun -colored glass, but also in brown
and olive glass, porcelain, ceramics and more. There may be remains of
an early structure near this point, hidden amidst the broad stand of
tamarisk trees, an original windbreak. Search of these remains is required
to ensure the most complete recovery possible of the early 20th century
artifacts and features. Photos, measurements, and artifacts shall be
catalogued, analyzed, reported, and curated at the Coachella Valley
Museum (Love et aI.1998:54).
CUL -2: The presence of a qualified archaeologist shall be required during all
project related ground disturbing activities, including clearing and
grubbing. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the ACBCI
and the City prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activity for all
construction phases and activities. If potentially significant archaeological
materials are discovered, all work must be halted in the vicinity of the
archaeological discovery until the archaeologist can assess the
significance of the find.
CUL -3: An approved Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) Native
American Cultural Resource Monitor shall be present during any ground
disturbing activities (including archaeological testing and surveys) for the
project. If potentially significant archaeological materials are discovered,
all work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until
the Tribal monitor can assess the significance of the find.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-21
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-22
June 2021
CUL -4: Prior to ground disturbance during any phase of the project, cultural
sensitivity training shall take place for all workers, conducted by the Agua
Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO).
CUL -5: Sites 33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545, along the base of Coral
Mountain and at the toe of the slope, which contains the rock art panels
and bedrock milling features, shall be avoided and protected in situ during
project construction through the establishment of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas. Deed restrictions shall be recorded for the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas and provided to the City prior to any
ground disturbance of any portion of Planning Area III. For the balance of
Site 33-001715, where scattered artifacts but no features were found,
mitigative surface collection and subsurface excavation shall be
completed prior to ground disturbance to recover a representative
sample of the cultural materials prior to the commencement of the
project and as a condition of grading permit issuance. The excavation shall
include a combination of standard archaeological units, shovel test pits,
and backhoe trenches to optimize both efficient coverage of the site area
and safe recovery of cultural remains. The survey protocols shall be
approved by ACBCI and their approval provided to the City in writing prior
to the initiation of any ground disturbing activity on the site.
4.5 Energy
a. Result in a 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?
Mitigation Measures
None Required.
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-22
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4.6 Geology and Soils
a. Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse
effects involving:
Mitigation Measures
GEO-1 All designs for any water body on the site shall be prepared by a qualified
Less than Significant
i. Rupture of a known fault
engineer and comply with all seismic codes in effect at the time they are
ii. Strong Seismic Shaking
constructed. All designs shall be based on and incorporate the
iii. Seismic -related ground failure,
including liquefaction
iv. Landslides
recommendation of a qualified soils engineer in a site and water body
specific report attached to the plans submitted to the City.
GEO-2 All earthwork including excavation, backfill and preparation of the
b. Substantial Soil Erosion or loss of
topsoil
subgrade soil, shall be performed in accordance with the geotechnical
c. Located on an Unstable Geologic
recommendations, presented below, and portions of the local regulatory
Unit
requirements, as applicable. All earthwork should be performed under the
d. Located on Expansive Soil
observation and testing of a qualified soil engineer. The following
e. Soils Incapable of Supporting
geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed project are
Septic Tanks or Alternative
based on observations from the field investigation program, laboratory
Water Disposal Systems (No
testing and geotechnical engineering analyses.
Impact)
f. Destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique
• Stripping: areas to be graded shall be cleared of the vegetation,
associated root systems and debris. All areas scheduled to receive fill
geologic feature
should be cleared of old fills and any irreducible matter. The stripping
shall be removed off -sit or stockpiled for later use in landscape areas.
Undocumented fill soil or loose soil shall be removed in its entirety
and replaced as engineered fill. Voids left by obstruction shall be
properly backfilled in accordance with the compaction
recommendations of this report.
• Preparation of the Residential Building Areas: in order to provide firm
and uniform foundation bearing conditions, the primary foundation
bearing soil shall be over -excavated and recompacted. Over -
excavation shall extend to a minimum depth of 3 feet below existing
grade or 3 feet blow the bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper.
Once adequate removals have been verified, the exposed native soil
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-23
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
shall be scarified, the moisture -conditioned and compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
• Preparation of the Hotel Building: In order to provide firm and
uniform foundation bearing conditions, over -excavation and re -
compaction through the building and foundation area is
recommended. All artificial fill soil and low density near surface
native soil shall be removed to a depth of at least 4 feet below
existing grade or 4 feet below the bottom of the footings, whichever
is greater. Remedial grading shall extend laterally, a minimum of five
feet beyond the building perimeter. The exposed surface shall then
be scarified, the moisture conditioned to within two percent of
optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction.
• Compaction: Soil to be used as engineered fill should be free of
organic material, debris and other deleterious substances, and shall
not contain irreducible matter greater than six (6) inches in
maximum dimension. All fill materials shall be placed in thin lifts not
exceeding six inches in a loose condition. If import fill is required, the
material shall be of a non -expansive nature and shall meet the
following criteria:
Plastic Index
Less than 12
Liquid Limit
Less than 35
Percent Soil Passing #200 Sieve
Between 15% and 35%
Maximum Aggregate Size
3 Inches
The subgrade and all fill material shall be compacted with
acceptable compaction equipment, to at least 90 percent relative
compaction. The bottom of the exposed subgrade shall be
observed by a representative of Sladden Engineering prior to fill
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-24
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
placement. Compaction testing shall be performed on all lifts in
order to verify proper placement of the fill materials.
• Shrinkage and Subsidence: Volumetric shrinkage of the material
that is excavated and replaced as controlled compacted fill shall be
anticipated. It is estimated that shrinkage could vary from 10
percent to 25 percent. Subsidence of the surfaces that are scarified
and compacted shall be between 1 and 3 tenths of a foot. This will
vary depending upon the type of equipment used, the moisture
content of the soil at the time of grading and the actual degree of
compaction attained.
GEO-3 All earth -moving operations reaching beyond the depth of two feet shall
be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor and continuous
monitoring will become necessary if undisturbed, potentially fossiliferous
lakebed sediments are encountered. The monitor shall be empowered to
stop earth moving activities if fossils are identified. The monitor shall be
prepared to quickly salvage fossils, but must have the power to temporarily
halt or divert construction equipment to allow for removal of abundant or
large specimens. A monitoring plan shall be provided to the City prior to
the issuance of any earth moving permit, or the disturbance of any soils on
the site, which will include:
• Samples of sediments shall be collected and processed to recover small
fossil remains.
• Recovered specimens shall be identified and curated at a repository
with permanent retrievable storage that would allow for further
research in the future.
A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered
specimens and a discussion of their significance when appropriate, shall
be prepared upon completion of the research procedures outlined above.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-25 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-26
June 2021
The report shall be provided to the City within 30 days of the conclusion
of monitoring activities.
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a. GHG Emissions that may
Significantly Impact the
Environment
b. Conflict with Applicable Plan,
Policy or Regulation
Mitigation Measures
GHG-1: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the Project Applicant shall
purchase a minimum of 72,000 MTCO2e credits (2,400 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 2,400 MTCO2e per year (72,000 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.
Significant and
Unavoidable
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a/b. Transport, Use, or Disposal of
Hazardous Materials and
Accidental Release of Hazardous
Materials,
c. Hazardous Materials within one-
quarter Mile of a School
d. Hazardous Materials Onsite
Pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.
e. Safety Hazard to public airport,
public airport use, or Within an
Mitigation Measures
None Required
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-26
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Airport Land Use Plan (No
Impact)
f. Interfere with the Adoption or
Implementation of an Emergency
Response Plan
g. Expose People or Structures to a
Significant Risk of Wildfires
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
a. Violation of Water Quality
Standards or Waste Discharge
Requirements
b. Depletion of Groundwater
Supplies or Interference with
Groundwater Recharge
c. Alteration of Existing Drainage
Patterns Resulting in
i. Erosion or Siltation
ii. Runoff Water that Would
Exceed Capacity of Existing
Stormwater Drainage
Systems
iii. Degradation of Water Quality
iv. Impede or Redirect Flood
Flows
d. Inundation by Flooding, Seiche,
Tsunami or Mudflow
e. Conflict or Obstruct
Implementation of Water Quality
Control Plan or Sustainable
Groundwater Management Plan
Mitigation Measures
None Required
Less than Significant
4.10 Land Use
a. Physically Divide an Established
Community (No Impact)
Mitigation Measures
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-27
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
b.
Conflict with Any Land Use Plan,
Policy or Regulation
None Required
4.11 Noise
a.
Generation of noise levels in
excess of established standards
Mitigation Measures
Less than Significant
b.
Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration
NOI-1
Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits,
plans shall include a note indicating that project construction activities
c.
Excessive noise levels due to
proximity to an airport or a
shall comply with the City of La Quinta Municipal Code requirements.
private air strip (No Impact)
NOI-2
During all project site construction, the construction contractors shall
equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with property operating
and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The
construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment
so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors
nearest the project site.
NOI-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 (i.e., to the center).
NOI-4
The contractor shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of
sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise.
NOI-5
A six-foot perimeter wall will be developed along the northern and eastern
property boundaries, adjacent to the proposed Low Density Residential
Planning Area (PA II), in order to protect the proposed onsite residential
uses from off-site traffic noise. The barriers shall provide a weight of at
least four pounds per square foot of face area with no decorative cutouts
or line -of -sight openings between shielded areas and the roadways. The
barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Unnecessary
openings or decorative cutouts shall not be made. All gaps (except for
weep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-28
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-29
June 2021
NOI-6 The operation of the Wave Basin and associated Wave machines shall be
limited to the daytime and evening hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.,
compliant with the recreational operational hours allowed by the City of La
Quinta.
4.12 Public Services
a. Increased demand on Public
Services
Mitigation Measures
None Required
Less than Significant
4.13 Transportation
a. Conflict with an applicable plan or
policy addressing the circulation
system
b. Inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)
c. Increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature
d. Result in inadequate emergency
access
Mitigation Measures
TRA -1 The project proponent shall contribute DIF as required by the City of La
Quinta.
TRA -1 The project proponent shall contribute DIF as required by the City of La
Quinta.
TRA -2 The project proponent shall contribute TUMF traffic impact mitigation
fees prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
TRA -3 The project proponent shall ensure that streetscape improvement plans
for the project frontage on Avenue 58, Madison Street and Avenue 60, are
submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the initiation of
landscape or roadway improvements.
TRA -4 The project proponent shall ensure that clear unobstructed sight
distances are provided at all site access points and internal intersections.
Sight distances shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to
approval of landscape and street improvement plans.
TRA -5 The project proponent shall ensure that final layout and site access design
are subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer prior to
final project approval.
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-29
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TRA -6 The project proponent shall ensure that emergency police, fire and
paramedic vehicle access are provided for the project prior to final project
approval.
TRA -7 The project proponent shall ensure that traffic signing and striping plans
shall be developed in conjunction with street improvement plans and
submitted to the City of La Quinta for review and approval during the
project approval process
TRA -8 The project proponent shall ensure that Construction Traffic Control Plans
are reviewed and approved by the City prior to project construction.
These plans are to be implemented during construction activities.
Construction includes onsite and offsite improvements.
TRA -9 If Special Events are to take place prior to the completion of Phase 3
construction, Phase 3 typical operations traffic improvements will be
completed or the applicant shall provide a focused traffic analysis with the
Temporary Use Permit that identifies any improvements that are not
necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service at study intersections.
If the analysis does not demonstrate acceptable operations, the TUP will
be denied.
TRA -10 If Special Events are to take place prior to the construction of Phase 3, a
special event traffic and parking plan will be submitted with each
Temporary Use Permit to ensure that special events will not cause any
significant traffic or parking impacts. If the analysis does not demonstrate
acceptable operations, the TUP will be deniedTRA-11Traffic Management
Plans will be submitted to the City and the Police Department for review
and approval prior to special events. Timing for installation of traffic
management measures will be scaled to the size and duration of the event.
In general, signage for large events should be in place five days prior and
two days following special events. The City and Police Department may
impose additional measures if determined to be necessary. Individual
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-30
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-31
June 2021
management plans for specific special events shall be submitted at least 30
days prior to the start of the event. The special event Traffic Management
Plans shall include the measures identified in Mitigation Measures TRA -12
through TRA -14 below.
TRA -12 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan, the project
proponent shall include the use of Portable changeable message signs
(CMS) or moveable mechanical electronic message boards. CMS will be
located at critical locations identified by the La Quinta Police Department
(LQPD) and in place 5 days ahead of the event and 2 days after.
TRA -13 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan the project
proponent shall include the use of law enforcement personnel and/or
special event flaggers to direct traffic in locations reviewed and approved
by the City and Police Department.
TRA 14 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan the project
proponent shall include the use of public service announcements (PSA) to
provide information to event guests and surrounding neighborhoods prior
to the event. Examples include online event information, brochures and
changeable message signs that include details such as suggested routes,
drop-off and parking facility locations.
TRA -15 The project proponent shall ensure that the proposed Coral Mountain
Interpretive Center trail designated by the Desert Recreation District
Master Plan and associated with the future Coral Mountain Interpretive
Center is incorporated into project plans. Accommodations for this trail
shall be located along the approximate toe of Coral Mountain, within the
designated conservation area at the southwestern edge of the property.
4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-31
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
a. Cause substantial adverse change
in significance of tribal cultural
resource that is
i. A site listed in the CRHR or
Local Register, Tribal Cultural
Resources
ii. A resource determined to be
significant to a California Native
American tribe.
Mitigation Measures
TCR -1: Before ground disturbing activities begin, the applicant shall contact the
ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office to arrange cultural monitoring.
The project requires the presence of an approved Agua Caliente Native
American Cultural Resource Monitor(s) during any ground disturbing
activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). Should buried
cultural deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that
destructive construction halt in the vicinity of the deposits, and the
Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and Guidelines), within 24 hours, to investigate and, if
necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic
Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation
Office.
TCR -2: The presence of a qualified archaeologist shall be required during all project
related ground disturbing activities, including clearing and grubbing. A
monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the ACBCI and
provided to the City prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activity
for all construction phases and activities. If potentially significant
archaeological materials are discovered, all work must be halted in the
vicinity of the archaeological discovery until the archaeologist can assess
the significance of the find.
TCR -3: Before ground disturbing activities, the project's archaeologist shall prepare
an Archaeological Treatment, Disposition, and Monitoring Plan to be
submitted to the ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office for approval. The
Treatment, Disposition and Monitoring Plan shall be deemed rejected by
ACBCI's Tribal Historic Preservation Office if no action to approve the plan
is taken within 30 days from submission for approval. If the ACBCI Tribal
Historic Preservation Office rejects two Treatment, Disposition and
Monitoring Plans submitted for approval, the applicant may appeal the
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-32
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
second denial to the La Quinta City Council for a final determination. The
approved Treatment, Disposition and Monitoring Plan shall be provided to
the City prior to any ground disturbance on the site.
TCR -4: Before ground disturbing activities, the project's archaeologist shall prepare
a Rock Art Management Plan, based on recommendations made in the
report by McCarthy and Mouriquand, and shall submit the plan to the
ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office for approval. The Rock Art
Management Plan shall be deemed rejected by ACBCI's Tribal Historic
Preservation Office if no action is taken to approve the plan within 30 days
of submission for approval. If the ACBCI Historic Preservation Office rejects
two Rock Art Management Plans submitted for approval, the applicant may
appeal the second denial to the La Quinta City Council for a final
determination. The approved Rock Art Management Plan shall be provided
to the City prior to any ground disturbance on the site.
TCR -5: Sites 33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545, along the base of Coral
Mountain and at the toe of the slope, which contains the rock art panels
and bedrock milling features, shall be avoided and protected in situ during
project construction through the establishment of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas; the Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be recorded on
the property, and proof of recordation shall be provided to the City prior
to any ground disturbance in Planning Area III. Nominations of these sites
to the National Register of Historic Places shall be filed with the
appropriate federal agency prior to the issuance of the first grading permit;
and the sites shall be subject to the provisions of the Rock Art Management
Plan.
TCR -6: For the portion of Site 33-001715 outside the preservation area established
in TCR -5, mitigative surface collection and subsurface excavation shall be
completed prior to any ground disturbance in Planning Area III to recover
a representative sample of the cultural materials prior to the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-33 June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
commencement of the project and as a condition of grading permit
issuance. The excavation shall include a combination of standard
archaeological units, shovel test pits, and backhoe trenches to optimize
both efficient coverage of the site area and safe recovery of cultural
remains. The survey protocols shall be approved by ACBCI. A report of
findings, including written confirmation of completion to ACBCI's
satisfaction, shall be provided to the City prior to ground disturbance.
TCR -7: Prior to ground disturbance in Planning Area III, a qualified archaeologist
shall complete surface collection, testing and excavation if necessary, for
sites 33-1716, 33-1717, 33-8386, 33-9001, 33-9003, 33-28907, 33-28908,
33-28909, 33-28910, 33-28911, 33-28912. A report of findings, including
written confirmation of completion to ACBCI's satisfaction, shall be
provided to the City prior to ground disturbance.
TCR -8: A comprehensive recordation program shall be prepared by a qualified
archaeologist for Site 33-008388. The program shall contain detailed
drawings and measurements to preserve the information on the adobe
building. Such information would include the floor plan, elevations,
building materials and their configurations, and any other notable
structural and architectural details. The adobe remains and an appropriate
buffer determined by the project archaeologist shall be flagged and
cornered off during all ground disturbance and preserved in place. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure in Planning Area II, the adobe will be fenced
off and an informational plaque describing the history of the ranch
complex shall be provided, and the project proponent shall provide the City
with the CC&Rs for the project area, demonstrating that the feature would
be maintained in perpetuity by the project's Homeowners
Association. Special attention should be given to the residence
foundation, which, may be the remains of one of the earlier structures at
the site, dating from 1920s or before. The footings and slabs at this location
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-34
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
should be cleared and measured, and attempts should be made to locate
the original trash pits or privies which could contain valuable artifacts
revealing much about life in the harsh environment at such an early date.
The scatter of artifacts has the greatest number of pre -1925 artifacts,
mostly in the form of sun -colored glass, but also in brown and olive glass,
porcelain, ceramics and more. There may be remains of an early structure
near this point, hidden amidst the broad stand of tamarisk trees, an original
windbreak. Search of these remains is required to ensure the most
complete recovery possible of the early 20th century artifacts and features.
Photos, measurements, and artifacts shall be catalogued, analyzed,
reported, and curated at the Coachella Valley Museum (Love et
a 1.1998:54).
TCR -9: The applicant shall coordinate with ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office
to ensure there are a sufficient number of Native American monitors for
the number of earth -moving machinery for each phase of development.
The applicant shall provide the City with fully executed monitoring
agreements prior to each phase of ground disturbing activity.
TCR -10: Should human remains be inadvertently discovered during ground
disturbance, the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 shall be followed. 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 of the remains, or any nearby area reasonably
suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the County Coroner has
examined the remains. 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
1-35
June 2021
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 1-36
June 2021
TCR -11: Prior to any ground disturbance, the applicant shall sign a curation
agreement with the ACBCI THPO. A fully executed copy of the agreement
shall be provided to the City.
TCR -12: Prior to any ground disturbance, cultural sensitivity training shall take
place for all contractors with the staff at the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic
Preservation Office (THPO).
4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
a. Require or result in construction
of new wastewater drainage
facilities (No Impact)
b. Have sufficient water supplies
available
c. Result in construction of new
wastewater facilities
d. Generate excess solid waste
e. Comply with federal, state and
local management and reduction
statues and regulations related to
solid waste (No Impact)
Mitigation Measures
None Required
Less than Significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 1-36
June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
2.0 Introduction
Chapter 2.0 Introduction
2.1 Purpose
This project 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 Coral Mountain Resort project. The project
will require certain discretionary approvals by the City and other governmental agencies. Therefore,
the project is subject to environmental review requirements under CEQA. This introduction is
included to provide an overview of the purpose, content and format of this Draft EIR and its relation
to the City of La Quinta's planning and environmental review process for the proposed project.
The purpose of a Draft EIR is to inform decision -makers and the general public of the potential
environmental impacts and identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant
impacts resulting from the proposed Coral Mountain Resort project. The La Quinta City Council will
consider the information presented in the document in making an informed decision regarding the
entitlements requested for the project.
The project area encompasses 929 acres. The project proposes several applications leading to the
development of a boutique resort with a recreational surf wave facility, as well as planned residential
neighborhoods and commercial and recreational uses. The applicant is requesting approval of a
General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002), Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004), Specific Plan (SP 2020-
0002), Specific Plan Amendment (03-067), Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2019-0005), Site Development
Permit (SDP 2021-0001), and Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002), as a part of the entitlement
process. The ultimate build -out of the approximately 386 -acre Specific Plan area includes up to 600
residential units on 232.3 acres; a resort hotel with up to 150 keys and complementary resort uses
and amenities, a recreational surf facility, and 57,000 square feet of commercial development on
120.8 acres; 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and open space
recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres. A detailed description of the project is included in
Chapter 3.0 (Project Description) of this Draft EIR.
The Draft EIR has been prepared in conformance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Section
21000, et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000, et
seq.), and with the City of La Quinta CEQA Guidelines to evaluate the potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the proposed project.
As described in Section 15121 (a) and 15362 of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR is an informational
document which will inform public agency decision makers and the public generally of the significant
environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-1 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
describe reasonable alternatives to the project. Thus, the purpose of this Draft EIR is to focus the
discussion on those potential environmental effects of the project that the Lead Agency has
determined could be significant. In addition, where applicable, feasible mitigation measures are
recommended that could reduce or avoid any significant environmental impacts identified for the
project to the maximum extent feasible.
2.2 Project History
The Coral Mountain Resort property was included as part of the "Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan". The
Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan was originally approved in 1988 by Riverside County and was
subsequently annexed to the City of La Quinta. Since then, the property has gone through various
entitlement activities and four specific plan amendments as part of the Andalusia at Coral Mountain
Specific Plan (SP 03-067), summarized in Table 2-1, Specific Plan Summary 1988-2017, below:
Table 2-1
Specific Plan Summary 1988-2017
Specific Plan Name
Year
Approved
Summary
Supporting
Documents
Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan
218 (County of Riverside)
1988
Original Specific Plan approved by Riverside County
Board of Supervisors; included 23 acres of
commercial use, 689 acres of residential use and
associated land uses, and three golf courses on
approximately 567 acres. All uses totaling
approximately 1,280 acres.
EIR Rancho La
Quinta SCH
#1987071302
Coral Mountain Specific Plan
218, Amendment I (County of
Riverside)
2000
Reduced development intensity by 762 dwelling
units and 25.8 acres of commercial uses. As revised
up to 3,500 dwelling units and 9.2 acres of
commercial uses.
TTM 2002-149
TTM 2002-12
Coral Mountain Specific Plan
Amendment II (City of La
Quinta)
2003
Changed name to "Coral Mountain" Specific Plan;
split specific plan into two specific plans: Trilogy (522
acres) and Andalusia (934 -acres); Supersedes Coral
Mountain Specific Plan 218 for Andalusia area.
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 approved
GPA 2003-093; CZ
2003-116; Specific
Plan 2003-067;
Site Development
Permit 2003-787;
EA 2003-483
Amendment III of Coral
Mountain SP
2013
Relocated golf clubhouse and provided higher
density around golf course.
Amendment IV of Andalusia at
Coral Mountain
2017
Revised development standards in Planning Area II
to allow for attached/detached residential villas of
up to 2 stories.
SP 03-067
The Specific Plan 2003-067 (SP 03-067), as amended, contains approximately 929 acres south of
Avenue 58, west of Monroe Street, north of Avenue 60, and east and west of Madison Street. SP 03-
067 was last amended in 2017. Andalusia East is currently under development consistent with SP 03-
067, providing low density residential units, an 18 -hole golf course, a clubhouse and associated
amenities. Andalusia West is currently undeveloped, but proposes residential and golf course uses
under SP 03-067. The proposed project includes a Specific Plan Amendment that will remove
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-2
June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Andalusia West from SP 03-067, and create a new Specific Plan to allow the development of the resort
community described above.
Preparation of the Draft EIR includes the preparation of technical studies such as Biological Resources,
Cultural Resources, Hydrology and Drainage, Noise, Traffic, etc., and continuing consultation with the
appropriate agencies.
2.3 Review of the Draft EIR
Upon completion of the Draft EIR, the City of La Quinta has 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 (Public Resources Code, Section 21161). Concurrent with the NOC,
this Draft EIR will be distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies,
surrounding cities, and interested parties, 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 Planning
Division, the La Quinta Library, and on the City's website. 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 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
http://www.laquintaca.Rov/thewave
La Quinta Library
78275 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Phone: 760-564-4767
Hours: Monday—Thursday 10 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Friday—Saturday 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.; and
Sunday 12 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Agencies, organizations, and interested parties who wish to comment on the Draft EIR during the
45 -day public review period are requested to provide written comments to:
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-3 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Phone: 760-341-4455
Email: consultingplanner@laquintaca.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 received from public agencies will
be made available for review at least 10 days prior to the public hearing before the City Council, at
which the certification of the EIR will be considered.
2.4 Scope of the EIR
2.4.1 Notice of Preparation
The City of La Quinta issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare a Draft EIR for a 30 -day
review period between February 17, 2021 and March 19, 2021. The NOP review period was extended
in order to include the Development Agreement in the project description pursuant to Article 2.5 of
Chapter 4, Division 1, Title 7 of the State California Government Code. The comment period was
extended to allow public comments until April 2, 2021. 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 Coral Mountain Resort NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. The Draft EIR will
address all environmental topics, excluding agriculture and forestry resources, mineral resources,
population and housing, recreation, and wildfires. Using the CEQA Guideline Environmental Checklist
Form, it was determined in the NOP that these sections would result in no impacts, and therefore,
are not required to be 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 those topics not further analyzed in this document.
The NOP was sent to the State Clearinghouse and to all responsible and trustee agencies, and to
interested parties. Issues raised by 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 six comment letters from Public Agencies and 135 comment letters from Area
Residents.
The comments from the Public Agencies are listed below:
1. CAL FIRE, in their letter dated March 24, 2021, requested to receive a Draft EIR.
2. Imperial Irrigation District (IID) indicated in their March 18, 2021 letter that the service provider
reviewed the project and provided comments regarding energy infrastructure.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-4 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
3. Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), in their letter dated February 18, 2021, requires
that the project participate in Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 tribal consultation.
4. Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) provided two letters (dated February 18,
2021, and March 8, 2021) indicating that the project is not located within an airport influence
area, and that they had no further comments.
5. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District indicated in their letter dated
March 9, 2021, that the project would not be impacted by the District Master Drainage Plan
facilities, nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed.
1. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in their letter dated March 9, 2021,
requested that the topic of air quality be discussed in the EIR. The District also requested that
all appendices and technical documents related to the air quality, health risks, and greenhouse
gas analyses and electronic versions of all emission calculation spreadsheets, and air quality
modeling and health risk assessment input and output files be provided to them.
The public comments from Area Residents consisted of letters expressing either support for or
opposition to the project. The concerns of area residents include the proposed zone change and the
project's compatibility with the area in which it is proposed, construction and operational traffic
impacts, construction and operational noise impacts, impacts to aesthetic resources (i.e., views, light
pollution), building heights, construction dust, project water use, and seismic disturbance.
The comment letters received by Public Agencies and Area Residents are contained in Appendix A.
2.4.2 CEQA Standards for Adequacy
This Draft EIR provides an evaluation of the potential environmental effects associated with the
development of the approximately 386 -acre Coral Mountain Resort project site, located at the
southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-5 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
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.
This EIR includes mitigation measures that are provided to eliminate or reduce to acceptable levels
the environmental impacts associated with the development of the approximately 386 -acre project
site.
This EIR has been prepared as a project level document that serves as the evaluation of the proposed
project, including the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan that if approved, would allow the
development of up to 600 residential units, a resort hotel with up to 150 keys and complementary
resort uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet of tourist commercial
development, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, and open space recreational
uses.
2.5 Organization of the EIR
This Draft EIR has been prepared as a Project -level EIR to evaluate the proposed project, including the
ultimate build out of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan. A comprehensive project description
including exhibits and maps is presented in Chapter 3.0, Project Description.
The Draft 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 the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting
Program 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, the scope of the EIR, and the review and certification
process. 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. Also
included is a discussion of the project objectives, intended uses of the EIR, responsible agencies and
their roles in the environmental process, and approvals that are needed for the proposed project.
Chapter 4.0: Environmental Impact Analysis. This chapter contains a comprehensive evaluation of
the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Impacts are organized into major environmental
topics. Each section includes a description of the environmental setting (the existing physical
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-6 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
environment and the regulatory environment); the methodology for evaluating impacts, significance
criteria, potential impacts, a discussion of existing rules and regulations imposed on the project by
the lead, responsible and trustee agencies, to reduce potential environmental effects of the project;
project design features built into the project to comply with regulatory requirements, such as Title 24
(Energy) and the California Building Code (CBC); proposed mitigation measures (in addition to
environmental requirements already imposed on the project by regulatory agencies), and a finding of
the level of significance after mitigation. The impact evaluation considers direct impacts, indirect
impacts, and cumulative impacts. The following environmental topics are addressed within Chapter
4.0.
Section 4.1 — Aesthetics: Addresses visual impacts that may occur with implementation of the
proposed Specific Plan.
Section 4.2—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
project's vicinity.
Section 4.3 — Biological Resources: Addresses the project's impacts on habitat and wildlife in the
area, and summarizes the biological resources study prepared for the project. This section provides a
summary of the Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), and
evaluates potential impacts associated with the project's proximity to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Area.
Section 4.4 — Cultural Resources: Addresses the impacts of project development on historic, cultural,
and archaeological resources. Note: Tribal Cultural Resources are addressed separately in Section
4.16 below.
Section 4.5 — Energy: 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 4.6 — Geology and Soils: Addresses the potential impacts the project may have on soils and
assesses the effects of the project in relation to geologic and seismic conditions, including the site's
proximity to the Santa Rosa Mountains. This section also addresses paleontological resources.
Section 4.7 — 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.
Section 4.8 — Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Addresses the likelihood of the presence of
hazardous materials or conditions on the project site and in the project area or the transport of
hazardous materials that may have the potential to impact human health. This section also includes
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-7 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
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.
Section 4.9 — 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.
This section also summarizes the requirements under the County's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) Permit for storm water control, retention and release.
Section 4.10 — Land Use and Planning: Addresses the related land use impacts associated with the
implementation of the project, including the project's compatibility with surrounding land uses, and
the need for a General Plan Zoning Map Amendment. 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 with the CVMSHCP.
Section 4.11 — Noise: Addresses the project's noise impacts that may occur during construction and
operation of future land uses after compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance.
Section 4.12 — Public Services: Addresses the project's impacts upon public service providers
including fire, police, schools, and other public services.
Section 4.13— Transportation: Addresses the project's impacts on the local and regional roadway
system including emergency access, public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, as well as
an analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Section 4.14 — 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 4.15 — Utilities and Service Systems: Addresses the project's impacts on water supply,
wastewater treatment, storm drains, electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, and solid waste.
It was determined in the NOP that agriculture and forestry resources, mineral resources, population
and housing, recreation, and wildfires would result in no impacts, and therefore are not required to
be analyzed further in the Draft EIR. Please consult Appendix A and Chapter 6.0 for further discussion
of agricultural and forestry resources, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, and
wildfire environmental topics.
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. Prior to the development of this Draft EIR, a Notice of
Preparation (NOP) was written. The NOP briefly analyzed the environmental topic to determine the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-8 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
significant impacts of the various threshold criteria as determined by the CEQA Guidelines. This
discussion presents the analysis of the environmental topic thresholds that result in no impacts. No
impacts related to agriculture and forestry, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land
use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, recreation, and wildfire, per the
CEQA Guidelines, are summarized in this chapter.
Chapter 7.0: Alternatives. This chapter compares the impacts of the proposed project with five
project alternatives: the No Project/No Build Alternative where no development would occur, a No
Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative, a Reduced Density Alternative, a Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative; and a Lake Amenity/No Hotel 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: Glossary of Terms. This chapter contains a full list of acronyms that were 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.
2.6 Reference Documents
2.6.1 Documents Incorporated by Reference
As permitted by CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, this Draft EIR has referenced several public
documents. Information from the documents, has been incorporated by reference, and has been
briefly summarized in the appropriate sections(s).
The documents (and their locations) include:
• La Quinta General Plan
(La Quinta Website: https://www.laquintaca.gov/business/design-and-
development/planning-division/2035-1a-quinta-general-plan)
• La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(La Quinta Website: https://www.laquintaca.gov/business/Ig2035-general-plan/documents)
• Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002)
• Amendment IV, Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 2003-067)
• Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP)
(CVMSHCP Website: https://www.cvmshcp.org/)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-9 June 2021
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.6.2 Documents Prepared for the Project
The technical studies prepared for the proposed project and other informational documents are listed
below, with their corresponding appendices in parentheses. These documents are included in their
entirety as part of the appendices for the Draft EIR.
Appendix A Notice of Preparation and Public Comment Letters
Appendix B Lighting Analysis
Appendix C Air Quality Report
Appendix D.1 Biological Report
Appendix D.2 Focused Bat Survey
Appendix E Cultural Report
Appendix F ACBCI Tribal Mitigation Letter
Appendix G Geotechnical Report
Appendix H Paleontological Report
Appendix 1 Greenhouse Gas Report
Appendix J.1 Preliminary Hydrology Report
Appendix J.2 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix J.3 Master Plan Hydrology Report
Appendix K.1 Noise Study
Appendix K.2 Noise Memorandum
Appendix L.1 Traffic Report
Appendix L.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation
Coral Mountain Specific Plan Final Water Supply Assessment and Revision
Letter
Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (2)
Appendix 0 Alternatives Water and Energy Comparisons
Appendix M
Appendix N
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
2-10 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
3.0 Project Description
Chapter 3.0 Project Description
3.1 Introduction
This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") describes the location, objectives,
and characteristics of the proposed Coral Mountain Resort 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 section is a description of the
proposed project's technical, economic, and environmental characteristics. A glossary of acronyms
used in this Draft EIR are provided in Chapter 9.0.
3.2 Project Location
The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, Riverside County. Exhibit 3-1, Regional
Location Map, shows the City's location within the larger Coachella Valley region. The project site
encompasses an area of approximately 929 acres in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta.
As shown in Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, the local area is characterized as a developing area with a
number of golf course and residential communities to the north, west, east, and southeast, the Santa
Rosa Mountains to the west and south, and open space and the Coachella Valley Water District
(CVWD) percolation ponds to the south. Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, displays an aerial view of the
project site, outlining section lines, project boundary, adjacent roadways and neighboring
communities. In addition to the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south, Coral Mountain is
situated within the southwest portion of the project property. Further discussion of the land uses
adjacent, and in proximity to the project, is included in the following section, Surrounding Land Uses. The
project is located in portions of Section 27 and 28, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino
Base Line and Meridian; and at Latitude 33° 37' 15" N, Longitude 116° 15' 21" W (approximate
geographic center of the site).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-1 June 2021
,.,, �..,it .r te
+�'�._
'¢.' ""# :4%.'
ar .- • ,1 . le j
!!r r�.,
1r l., • �. f lli�^ ;!
lt• +� �� i til 'Ii» f i
liar
� .r S +� s rte ' ` .._ •: ,:fi- . `:{ ", -"; . , '�f`y
•
-eriicy.. -1,1':----;:t.;,-
' ,!
DESERT
HOT
SPRINGS1
PALM SPRINGS
L
CATHEDRAL
CITY
'j •
Pr,,.
1
4
RANCHO
MIRAGE
PALM
DESERT
INDIAN
WELLS
L
1
•
LA
QUINTA
Project Site
° le - '' riiAt.--- .
R
N.T.S.
I
INDIO
s
r
COACHELLA
•k
1. Al
4"-!'
w v !
• l
MSA CONSULTING, INC
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.1
52ND AVENUE
w
1-
C)
w
0
z
0
54TH, AVENUE
AMENDMENT V
OF SP 03-067
Legend:
Project Boundary
1
1
Existing City / County Boundary
r
AVENUE 60-
0 Ft
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC. VICINITY MAP
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.2
Legend:
Project Boundary
Li Aut:
AVENUE 58
W
W
w
0
Z
0
PROJECT SITE
ha;
1
AMENDMENT V OF SP 03-067
;es
__ __,
I 1
/1I
1 '/
f/
I
1
1
AVENUE 60 ---_--
MSA CONSULTING, INC. SITE LOCATION MAP
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.3
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.3 Surrounding Land Uses
As shown in Exhibit 3-2, Vicinity Map, and Exhibit 3-3, Site Location Map, the project occupies
approximately 929 acres east and west of Madison Street. The property is bounded by Avenue 58 and
low density residential and golf communities, and Imperial Irrigation District (IID) La Quinta
Headquarters building and substation on the north; Monroe Street, residential estates, vacant land,
and agricultural land on the east; Avenue 60, residential estates, and residential and golf communities
on the south; and vacant land and Coral Mountain on the west.
The proposed project to be developed under SP 2020-0002 occupies approximately 386 acres west
of Madison Street. The proposed project is generally bounded by vacant land and Avenue 58 on the
north; Madison Street on the east; residential estates, vacant land, and the Avenue 60 alignment on
the south; Coral Mountain, and vacant land to the west. Land uses surrounding the specific plan area
are as follows (see the aerial photograph in Exhibit 3-2):
Direction Description
North • Avenue 58
• Vacant Land
• Developed and Undeveloped Single Family Residential Communities
• Golf Course
East
South
• Madison Street
• Single Family Residences in Andalusia Country Club
• Golf Course in Andalusia
• Vacant lands
• Avenue 60
• Developed and Undeveloped Single Family Residences and Communities
• Golf Course, including Trilogy
• Vacant Land
• CVWD Levee
West • Coral Mountain
• Natural Open Space
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-5 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.4 Project Site History
The project property was originally included as part of the "Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan," first
approved in 1988 by Riverside County. The Specific Plan area was later annexed to the City of La
Quinta. The area south of Avenue 58 and north of Avenue 60 became known as the "Andalusia at
Coral Mountain Specific Plan 03-067" and included areas east and west of Madison Street. Since then,
the property has gone through various entitlement activities and four specific plan amendments as
part of the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067), summarized in Table 3-1, below.
Table 3-1
Specific Plan Summary 1988-2017
Specific Plan Name
Year
Approved
Summary
Supporting Documents
Rancho La Quinta
Specific Plan 218
(County of Riverside)
1988
Original Specific Plan 218 approved by Riverside
County Board of Supervisors; included a maximum
development of 4,262 dwelling units, 380 acres of
golf and 35 acres of commercial uses.
EIR Rancho La Quinta
SCH #1987071302
Coral Mountain
Specific Plan 218,
Amendment I
(County of Riverside)
2000
Reduced development intensity by 762 dwelling
units and 25.8 acres of commercial uses to up to
3,500 dwelling units and 9.2 acres of commercial
uses.
TTM 2002-149 TTM
2002-12
Coral Mountain
Specific Plan
Amendment II (City
of La Quinta)
2003
Changed name to "Coral Mountain" Specific Plan;
split specific plan into two specific plans: Trilogy
(522 acres) and Andalusia (934 -acres); Supersedes
Coral Mountain Specific Plan 218 for Andalusia area.
Environmental Assessment 2003-483 approved
GPA 2003-093; CZ
2003-116; Specific Plan
2003-067; Site
Development Permit
2003-787; EA 2003-483
Amendment 111 of
Coral Mountain SP
2013
Relocated golf clubhouse and provided higher
density around golf course.
Amendment IV of
Andalusia at Coral
Mountain
2017
Revised development standards in Planning Area 11
to allow for attached/detached residential villas of
up to 2 stories.
The eastern half of SP 03-067 is being developed with the Andalusia Country Club while the western
half has remained vacant. Exhibit 3-4, Existing General Plan Land Use Map, illustrates the project's
existing General Plan land use designation. Approval of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will
establish a new master plan and development standards for the property west of Madison Street to
allow creation of a boutique resort, master -planned community and a Wave Basin recreational
amenity. Concurrently, Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067 is being processed to remove the
western half such that only the Andalusia Country Club east of Madison Street will remain. This will
create two separate and distinct communities, "Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and
"Andalusia Country Club", east of Madison Street.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-6 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
Low Density Residential
Medium/High Density Residential
General Commercial
Open Space - Natural
Open Space - Recreation
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
7603209811 msaconsultinginc.com
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.4
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.5 Proposed Project
3.5.1 Project Objectives
The project area consists of 929 acres in total. Of that, 543 acres occur on the east side of Madison
Street, and will continue to develop as provided under SP 03-067, as a residential and golf country
club. The western portion of the project, on the west side of Madison Street, proposes the
development of the approximately 386 -acre area. This portion of the project would be developed
under a new Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) with up to 496 low density residential units on 232.3 acres;
a resort hotel with up to 150 keys and complementary resort uses and amenities, a recreational Wave
Basin facility, 104 resort residential units, and 57,000 square feet of commercial development on
120.8 acres; 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and open space
recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres.
The project has identified the following objectives:
• To implement a plan that recognizes and responds to the natural and aesthetic character of
the property.
• To create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales
tax revenues in order to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
• To promote walkability and non -motorized connectivity as an integral part of the project
design, including (1) establishing residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use
trails that connect neighborhoods throughout the project; and (2) providing "walk streets" in
the Resort area to provide internal connection between facilities within the Resort and the
Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
• Provide a variety of open space and recreational uses (active and passive).
• Design a planned community that complements existing development in the surrounding area
and is compatible with the surrounding environment.
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert".
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-8 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.5.2 Project Description
The project area encompasses 929 acres. As previously stated in Section 3.4, Project Site History, the
project site is currently a part of the "Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan 03-067", which
includes the area south of Avenue 58 and east and west of Madison Street. The area east of Madison
Street encompasses the Andalusia Country Club property. The area west of Madison Street is
currently vacant. Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067 is being processed to remove the area west
of Madison Street from the Specific Plan area, thus, creating two separate and distinct communities,
"Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and "Andalusia Country Club", east of Madison
Street. The project proposes several applications leading to the development of a boutique resort
with a recreational surf wave facility, as well as planned residential neighborhoods and commercial
and recreational uses on the west side of Madison Street. The ultimate build -out of the approximately
386 -acre Specific Plan area includes up to 600 residential units on 232.3 acres; a resort hotel with up
to 150 keys and complementary resort uses and amenities, a recreational surf facility, and 57,000
square feet of commercial development on 120.8 acres; 60,000 square feet of neighborhood
commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and open space recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres.
The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002), Zone Change
(ZC 2019-0004), Specific Plan Amendment (SP 03-067), Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002), Tentative Tract
Map (TTM 2019-0005), Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001), and Development Agreement (DA
2021-0002), as a part of the entitlement process. A detailed description of the requested entitlements
is included below.
General Plan Amendment
The General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002) will amend the current General Plan land use
designations from General Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Open Space — Recreation to
Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space —
Recreation, as shown in Exhibit 3-5.
Zone Change
The proposed Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004) will revise the existing zoning of the Specific Plan Area
from Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Golf Course, to Neighborhood
Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Tourist Commercial
(CT), as shown in Exhibit 3-6.
Specific Plan Amendment
The Specific Plan Amendment (Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067) is being processed to remove
the area west of Madison Street from Specific Plan 03-067, thus, creating two separate and distinct
communities, "Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and "Andalusia Country Club", east
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-9 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
of Madison Street. The Specific Plan Amendment will result in only the deletion of the westerly 386
acres. No changes to land use designations, densities or intensities, development standards or
guidelines are proposed for the lands east of Madison Street. It is expected that Andalusia will
continue to build out under the requirements of the SPA.
Specific Plan
Approval of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) will establish a new master plan
governing the allowable land uses, design guidelines, and development standards for the 386 -acre
property west of Madison Street, to allow creation of a boutique resort and master -planned
community. The project will result in a variety of land uses on the westerly 386 acres, as shown in
Exhibit 3-5, Proposed General Plan Land Use Map. Low Density Residential land uses will occupy
approximately 232.3 acres and result in a maximum of 496 dwelling units. Tourist Commercial land
uses will result in 104 dwelling units, 150 hotel rooms, and 57,000 square feet of private resort -serving
commercial uses available to residents and hotel guests, on approximately 120.8 acres. General
Commercial land uses will occupy approximately 7.7 acres, with up to 60,000 square feet of retail
commercial uses available to the general public. Open Space Recreation land uses will occur on
approximately 23.6 acres in the southwest portion of the site.
Table 3-2, Proposed Land Use Summary, shows the land use associated with each planning area.
Exhibit 3-6, Planning Area Land Use Plan, shows the location of each project planning area.
Table 3-2
Proposed Land Use Summary
Planning Area
(PA)
Land Use
Category
Gross
Land Area
(Acres)
Non-
Residential
Building (SF)
Max.
Dwelling
Units (DU)
Max.
Hotel/Resort
Units (DU)
PA 1
GC
7.7
60,0001
PA II
LDR
232.3
496
PA III
TC
120.8
57,0002
104
150
PA IV
OS -R
23.6
Right of Way
1.5
Total
385.9
117,000
600
150
Note: GC = General Commercial, LDR = Low Density Residential, TC = Tourist Commercial, OS -R = Open
Space Recreation
1. Consisting of retail commercial uses available to the general public.
2. Consisting of private resort -serving commercial uses available only to residents and hotel guests.
Development Standards and Design Guidelines
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan 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.
The development standards detail permitted uses, lot sizes, building and structure heights, building
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-10 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
setbacks, front and rear setbacks, building floor areas, parking, wall heights, and light pole heights of
each planning area.
The design guidelines outlined in the Specific Plan are established to assist the developer of the
project 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
Generally, the conceptual landscape plan will incorporate landscape elements that establish a "sense
of place" and create visual unity and compatibility throughout the project. The theme of the
landscape architecture at the project is to create a lush desert character of visual variety and textural
interest while complying with water conservation techniques based on plant selection and technical
irrigation system design. Key landscape elements would include entryways, streetscapes, and
common areas. The Specific Plan provides a thorough list of compatible trees, shrubs, and
groundcovers to be incorporated as part of the landscape design. Final landscape design will be
subject to Site Development Permit review and Final Landscaping Plan permits. Walls, fences,
monumentation, and all other hardscape elements at project entries will utilize materials, color, and
detailing that are compatible with the various proposed uses.
Circulation
Vehicular access to the project site will utilize existing public arterial roads, including Avenue 58,
Madison Street, and Avenue 60. Avenue 58, to the north, will provide two access points to the
Neighborhood Commercial area (PA 1). Madison Street, to the east, will provide two points of access
to the site; one to the Neighborhood Commercial area (PA I), and one as the primary access to the
balance of the site. Avenue 60, to the south would provide secondary access to PA 111 in the southern
portion of the site.
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's
multi -modal transportation system will consist of sidewalks, multi -use trails, and shared use of low -
speed, low-volume roadways, specifically including off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths/routes;
sidewalks in higher traffic areas; pedestrian/bicycle crosswalks; pedestrian and multi -use paths and
streets; traffic calming methods; short street segments with frequent caution zones and stopping
points; and golf cart and other alternative forms of personal transportation.
See Exhibit 3-8, Vehicular Circulation Plan, and Exhibit 3-9, Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan, for the
project's proposed circulation plans.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-11 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Tentative Tract Map
The Tentative Tract Map (TTM 2019-0005) subdivides the property into smaller lots for development.
The TTM will subdivide all of Planning Area III (PA III), and the western corner of PA II into lots suitable
for the development of the uses permitted for these areas in the Specific Plan. Future TTMs may be
filed with each phase of development as necessary to implement the balance of the project.
Site Development Permit
The Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001) is required by the City for approval of site-specific
landscape design, architectural design, and site plan for the Wave Basin along with associated
mechanical equipment and improvements (Planning Area III -B). Future SDPs will be filed with each
phase of development as necessary to implement the balance of the project. The SDP includes:
• The Wave Basin site plan
• Winch Plans and sections of the Wave Basin (the winches are located in the mechanical
buildings and assist in making the waves)
• Surf Lighting
• Architecture Plans and elevations of the maintenance yard, maintenance building, water
treatment building, north and south winch.
• Photometric Plans for the lighting surrounding the Wave Basin
• Landscape Plans for the proposed landscaped areas around the Wave Basin and the main drive
to the primary Madison Street entry.
Development Agreement
The Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002) would vest the applicant's right to develop the Coral
Mountain Resort Specific Plan area pursuant to the entitlements described above, address short-term
rentals within all planning areas of the project, ensure that the project has a net positive fiscal impact
on the City despite the lack of property tax revenue to the City through 2035, and ensure the timely
completion of infrastructure to serve the project and surrounding area, and ensure that the project
design features and mitigation measures identified in this EIR are enforceable by the City as project
requirements.
Off -Site Improvements
In addition to the proposed onsite development, project implementation will also include the
installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58,
as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in
the existing right-of-way.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-12 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.5.3 Project Components
The build out components include:
• 600 Dwelling Units of varying types
o 496 single family attached and detached dwellings and affiliated amenities (Low Density
Residential land use)
• Low Density Residential product types may include estate compounds, single-family
detached/attached units, alley loaded homes, and clustered products.
o 104 resort residential units (Tourist Commercial land use)
• Resort residential product types may include single family detached units, townhomes,
and stacked flats.
• 60,000 square feet of publicly accessible neighborhood commercial building space
• 150 -key resort with customary resort amenities
o The Resort Hotel will provide a hospitality component, with amenities such as a restaurant
and bar, retail shop, meeting space, swimming pool, fitness center, spa and lodging.
o Lodging options will provide a range of traditional hotel rooms, suites, and casitas.
• 57,000 square feet of resort -serving commercial and recreational building space
o Residents and guests of the property will have exclusive use of resort commercial.
• The Wave Basin
16.62 -acre artificial surf Wave Basin
o Residents and guests of the property will have exclusive use of Wave Basin
o Equipment and service space for the Wave Basin includes
• Two approximately 6,000 -square -foot winch areas, each having:
• 1,900 -square -foot winch buildings
• 2,800 -square -foot shade structures
• 37,500 -square -foot Service Yard, including:
• 2,400 -square -foot Maintenance Workshop
• 2,400 -square -foot Water Treatment building
• 0.5 -million -gallon (MG) Water Tank
o The project applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at this location
involving attendance of not -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day, for up to 4 days (up to 4 events
per year).
• 26.5 acres of graded area, south of the Wave Basin
o Providing unprogrammed gathering and staging space for temporary equipment such as
portable toilets, shade structures, tenting for inclement weather, and catering equipment.
• Approximately 24 acres of natural open space for low -impact active and passive recreation
activities.
o Including hiking, biking, and ropes courses.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-13 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
General Commercial
Low Density Residential
Tourist Commercial
Open Space (Recreation)
AVENUE 58
I
•I
••
GENERAL
COMMERCIAL
LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
OPEN S
RECRE
•
•
•
•
•
I Im
m
I
•
•
I
I
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
7603209811 msaconsultinginc.com
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
Et
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.5
Legend:
Project Boundary
Low Density Residential (RL)
Tourist Commercial (CT)
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Parks and Recreation (PR)
AVENUE 58
.
1
1 NEIGHBORHOOD
ICOMMERCIAL (CN)
•1
•1
1
1
LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (RL)
•
•
•
1
1
1
1
PAR
• AN
RECREATI
•
..
N (PR)
OURIST
COMME L (CT
AVENUE 60
•
1
I
•
•
•
•
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC. PROPOSED ZONING
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
7603209811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.6
Legend:
Project Boundary
Planning Area Boundary
- — — — -
Planning Area Sub -Boundary
Neighborhood Commercial
Low Density Residential
Resort
Open Space (Recreation)
■ ■
MI . - .. _ ■ ■ - . ■
AVENUE 58
1
■
1
■
PA II
LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL �Z
■
■
I
•
PA I
OPEN SP
..
CE
..
..
AVENUE 60
PA II
•
•
iI
1.
`N
m
■-1
i
■
i
■
1
i
•
•
i
N.T.S.
EXHIBIT
MSA CONSULTING, INC. / '[ PLANNING AREA LAND USE PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
3.7
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.6 Specific Plan Planning Areas
The Specific Plan proposes the development of four planning areas, defined in this section. Table 3-
3, below, indicates each planning area, and its proposed acreages, and dwelling units. Exhibit 3-7,
Planning Area Land Use Plan, illustrates the proposed planning area locations.
Table 3-3
Proposed Planning Area Summary
PA
Land Use (Zone)'
Acres
Commercial (SF)
Max. Units
I
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
7.7
60,000 SF
II
Low Density Residential (RL)
232.3
496 Units
III
Resort (CT)
III -A: Resort Hotel
8.5
150 rooms
III -B: The Wave Basin
31.22
III -C: Wave Club
3.2
III -D: Resort Residential West
40.5
104 units
III -E: Resort Residential East
111-F: The Farm
11
III -G: Back of House
26.5
PA III Total acreage
120.8
57,000 SF
IV
Open Space Recreational (PR)
23.6
Roads
1.6
Total
386
60,000 CN
57,000 CT
600 DU
150 rooms
1. Zone Codes: Neighborhood Commercial = CN; Low Density Residential = RL; Tourist Commercial = CT;
Parks and Recreation = PR
2. The Wave Subarea is 31.2 acres and contains a 16.62 -acre artificial surf wave basin.
3.6.1 Planning Area I — Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Located on 7.7 acres at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, PA I allows for the
construction of 60,000 square feet of publicly accessible neighborhood commercial building space with
affiliated circulation and infrastructure improvements. The retail development will consist of a mixture
of neighborhood commercial developments including but not limited to retail stores, convenience
stores, and restaurants.
All uses listed in the Neighborhood Commercial District of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Section
9.80.020, Table 9-5) are allowed in PA -I, except that the uses listed below are specifically considered
permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Retail Stores
- Food, liquor, and convenience stores
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-17 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- Restaurants
- Banks
- Medical offices
The site plan, architecture and landscaping for this Planning Area will be reviewed pursuant to the
requirements of Municipal Code Section 9.120.010, Site Development Permits in the future.
3.6.2 Planning Area II — Low Density Residential (RL)
Located on approximately 232.3 acres on the northern and eastern portions of the project, PA -II
allows for the construction of up to 496 single-family attached and detached dwellings. Residential
neighborhoods of various types would occur throughout the project. Product types may include
estate compounds, single-family detached/attached units, alley loaded homes, and clustered
products. Ownership and occupancy of these units may include primary, secondary and fractional
ownership along with short term vacation rentals. Open space, golf, and various other
complementary recreational uses may be integrated with residential development. PA -II is designated
a Low Density Residential land use.
Allowable uses listed in the Low Density Residential District of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table
9.40.030) are allowed in PA -II in accordance with Table 9-1, except that the uses listed below are
specifically considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Single Family Detached Dwellings
- Single Family Detached Patio Homes
- Duplexes
- Single Family Attached Dwellings
- Townhome Dwellings
- Condominium Multi -family
- Short term Vacation Rental Units
- Timeshare Units
- Fractional Ownership Units
- Lakes and active recreation
- Golf Courses, Driving Ranges, and Golf Related
Uses
The site plan(s), architecture and landscaping for this Planning Area will be reviewed pursuant to the
requirements of Municipal Code Section 9.210.010, Site Development Permits (SDP), and may be
brought forward as multiple SDPs in the future.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-18 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.6.3 Planning Area III — Tourist Commercial (TC)
Planning Area III (PA -III) is intended to allow for Resort Residential and Tourist Commercial uses and
is located in the south-central portion of the project. PA -III is structured around the Wave basin, a
private artificial wave generating basin. Located on approximately 120.8 acres, PA -III will allow the
construction of a private resort including the Wave Basin, a boutique hotel, a walkable residential
village, an entertainment and fitness complex, and a private community clubhouse. PA -III will contain
150 hotel keys, 104 residential units, and 57,000 square feet of resort -serving commercial and
recreational building space, outdoor amenities, and a community clubhouse. Planning Area III is
divided into seven planning subareas (A through G) listed below. The site plan(s), architecture and
landscaping for each subarea will be reviewed pursuant to the requirements of Municipal Code Section
9.210.010, Site Development Permits (SDP), and may be brought forward as multiple SDPs in the future.
SDP 2021-0001, for the Wave Basin and supporting facilities, is the first SDP proposed for the project.
PA 111-A — Resort Hotel:
The Resort Hotel subarea contains approximately 8.5 acres and will accommodate a boutique resort
hotel with up to 150 keys along with 57,000 square feet of commercial resort amenities such as
eateries/cafes and retail shops. In -hotel services are expected to include a restaurant and bar,
meeting space, swimming pool, fitness center, and spa. Lodging options will provide a range of
traditional hotel rooms, suites, and casitas.
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Bars and cocktail lounges
- Retail Stores
- Restaurants, other than drive-through
- Indoor and outdoor recreation facilities
- Meeting and club facilities
- Parking lots
- Recreational water amenities
- Resort residential
- Resort hotel
- Resort support and Accessory Uses
- Clubhouse
- Outdoor Storage
PA 111-B — The Wave Basin:
The Wave Basin subarea contains approximately 31.2 acres containing an artificial surf wave basin
and 49,500 square feet of equipment and support space. The artificial surf wave basin, "The Wave
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-19 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Basin," will be approximately 16.62 acres (water body footprint is 12.14 acres), and will feature
technology designed to re-create ocean waves for recreational surfing by individual resort residents
and hotel guests, as well as the hosting of limited private and public events by reservation. The
capacity of the Wave Basin is 30 people. The users will be able to surf on the Basin for 30 -minute
intervals. It is likely that some users will continue to surf after their 30 -minute interval. The Wave
Basin requires ancillary operational, administrative and maintenance functions for basin operations
that are provided immediately south of the Wave Basin, and include two winch areas and a service
yard. The Wave Basin operates under ambient temperature and does not require heating. Night-time
lighting of The Wave Basin will include seventeen, 80 -foot -high light poles, surrounding the Wave
Basin. The light poles will be down -ward oriented and designed to illuminate only the Wave Basin.
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Bars and Cocktail Lounges
- Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Facilities
- Recreational Water Amenities
- Water Storage Tanks
- Outdoor Storage
PA III -C — Wave Club:
The Wave Club subarea contains approximately 3.2 acres fronting the Wave basin and will function
as a private clubhouse with amenities for exclusive use by residents and hotel guests. Representative
amenities at the Wave Club may include changing rooms, surfboard storage, pool, and casual
dining/lounge area.
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Bars and Cocktail Lounges
- Retail Stores
- Restaurants, other than drive-through
- Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Facilities
- Meeting and Club Facilities
- Parking Lots
- Recreational Water Amenities
- Resort Residential
- Resort Support and Accessory Uses
- Clubhouse
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-20 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- Outdoor Storage
PA III -D, PA III -E — Resort Residential West and East:
These planning subareas contain approximately 40.5 acres and are planned as a grid -patterned village
that flanks the hotel and resort amenities. Structures will consist of 104 residential units designed on
a compact grid -like network of streets and pathways. The majority of the Resort Residential
neighborhoods are located within a 1,200 -foot walking radius of the Hotel, Wave Basin, Wave Club,
and Farm, to concentrate density within easy walking distance of the key resort amenities. Residents
are expected to walk or use alternate forms of transportation such as golf -carts, bikes, scooters, and
skateboards to access the hotel or resort amenities. It is anticipated that many resort residence
owners will participate in a short-term rental program operated from the hotel.
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Community Gardens
- Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Facilities
- Parking Lots
- Resort Residential
- Resort Hotel
- Resort Support and Accessory Uses
- Outdoor Storage
PA III -F — The Farm:
The Farm contains approximately 11 acres of land for private resort -serving entertainment and fitness
facilities. It will offer a wide range of community and active lifestyle amenities such as golf practice
and training facilities, hiking, biking, bicycle pump -track, fitness areas, and swimming pool areas. In
addition, spa and dining facilities may be provided for residents and hotel guests.
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Bars and Cocktail Lounges
- Retail Stores
- Community Gardens
- Restaurants, other than drive-through
- Community Gardens
- Golf Facilities
- Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Facilities
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-21 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- Meeting and Club Facilities
- Parking Lots
- Recreational Water Amenities
- Resort Support and Accessory Uses
- Clubhouse
- Outdoor Storage
PA III -G — Back of House:
The Back of House subarea contains approximately 26.5 acres that will be graded as level, largely
open land south of the Wave Basin. This subarea will provide unprogrammed gathering and staging
space for temporary equipment such as port -a -potties, shade structures, tenting for inclement
weather, and catering equipment that might be used during temporary events. It will also house
necessary permanent support facilities for maintenance, service and administrative operation of the
Wave basin and resort. When not in use, this subarea will be maintained as open space. The Back of
House subarea will be used to host public ticketed events on the Wave basin. These events may occur
up to 4 times per year and are restricted to 4 days duration, with a maximum attendance of 2,500
guests per day. Prior to any events taking place, the applicant will be required to process and receive
approval for Temporary Use Permit(s).
Allowable uses listed in the Tourist Commercial use of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Table 9.80.020)
are allowed in PA -III in accordance with Table 9-5, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Facilities
- Parking Lots
- Resort Support and Accessory Uses
- Outdoor Storage
3.6.4 Planning Area IV — Parks and Recreation (PR)
Planning Area IV (PA -IV) consists of approximately 23.6 acres of natural open space that may be used
for low -impact active and passive recreation activities such as hiking, biking and ropes courses. The
recreational uses are intended to be compatible with the resort. This Planning Area will be retained
largely as natural desert land to preserve the backdrop of Coral Mountain.
All uses listed in the Parks and Recreation District of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Section 9.120.020)
are allowed in PA -IV in accordance with Table 9-8, except that the uses listed below are specifically
considered permitted uses.
Permitted Uses
- Multi -Use, Nature and Bike Courses/Trails
- Shade Structures, Relief Stations
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-22 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- Recreational Equipment (including but not limited to aerial adventure and rope courses,
bicycle park, ziplines, etc.)
- Water Tanks and Reservoirs
- Wayfinding Signage
The site plan(s), architecture and landscaping for this Planning Area will be reviewed pursuant to the
requirements of Municipal Code Section 9.210.010, Site Development Permits (SDP), and may be
brought forward as multiple SDPs in the future.
3.6.5 Project Construction
According to the Coral Mountain Specific Plan, project construction will occur in eight (8) primary
development areas with buildout anticipated to occur in three primary phases over approximately
4- to 6 -years. Each primary development area may be broken into subphases in response to
market conditions and consumer demand. For example, the hotel of up to 150 keys may be
constructed in multiple subphases. Exhibit 3-8, Conceptual Development Plan, reflects the
anticipated construction sequence and may be non -sequential and adjusted subject to market
conditions (so long as necessary utilities and access are provided). Phased development will be
accompanied by the orderly extension of circulation and parking facilities, public utilities, and
infrastructure in accordance with the final conditions of approval for the project.
The applicant proposes to commence construction of the Wave Basin first, due to longer construction
timelines than the other uses within the Specific Plan. The Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001)
for the Wave Basin described above is being processed concurrently with the initial entitlements. One
or more SDPs for other portions of the Tourist Commercial and Low Density Residential areas
(designated as Phase 2 on Exhibit 3-8) will be filed prior to final approval of the Wave Basin SDP.
Following this entitlement and construction schedule, it is anticipated that the Wave Basin and other
Tourist Commercial and Residential land uses will be completed and ready for occupancy at
approximately the same time.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-23 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
- -
Phase Boundary
– — — — –
Development Area Boundary
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Notes: 1. Phasing plan reflects the anticipated construction
sequence. It is conceptual and subject to refinement
in response to market conditions.
2. Numbers 1 - 8 indicate Development Areas.
AVENUE 58
•
7
•
0
PHASE 2 u
s
1
m
1
1
1
1
I
1
r
4
••
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.8
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.7 Circulation Plan
The circulation plan proposes a multi -modal approach providing transportation facilities within the
Specific Plan area for a variety of user groups including motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers of
electric vehicles, thereby decreasing automobile dependency. Convenient access and parking are
planned in close proximity to retail and resort areas. 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's multi -modal transportation system will consist of
sidewalks, multi -use trails, and shared use of low -speed, low-volume roadways, specifically including:
off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths/routes; sidewalks in higher traffic areas; pedestrian/bicycle
crosswalks; pedestrian and multi -use paths and streets; traffic calming methods; short street
segments with frequent caution zones and stopping points; and golf cart routes and other alternative
forms of personal transportation.
Vehicular Circulation
Vehicular access to the project site will utilize existing public arterial roads, including Avenue 58,
Avenue 60 and Madison Street. Avenue 58 and Madison Street are largely improved to their ultimate
lane width, needing only the addition of minor widening, a meandering multi-purpose trail, sidewalks,
and parkway landscaping along the boundary of the Specific Plan area. Avenue 60, to the south, is
designated as a Collector with an ultimate right-of-way width of 80 feet. Ultimate improvements will
include painted bike lanes and two travel lanes separated by a painted median. The project will
include half width improvement of Avenue 60 (north side) along the entire project frontage, to
include a Class II Golf Cart/NEV path and multiuse path. The surrounding roadways will be improved
to the standards of the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element. The internal circulation
system will consist of a series of roads providing access to the individual residential and recreational
components within the Specific Plan area. The proposed internal rights of way will vary from 32-
foot/33-foot private drives to the 100 -foot entry drive.
As shown in Exhibit 3-9, Circulation Plan, the interior street system proposed for the project is an
internal system of private streets linking all neighborhoods to provide open circulation. Per Exhibit 3-
9, the project proposes various road categories and rights-of-way. These include the Entry Drive, Local
Road "A", Resort Drive, and Resort Commercial Drive. The Entry Drive is the main entry off of Madison
Street that provides access to the resort area. Local Roads branch off of the primary entry drive and
link residential and resort residential areas to the Entry Drive. Resort Drives are open to the guests
and residences of the community to convey vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles throughout the
project. A secondary entrance is provided from Avenue 60.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-25 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is bordered on the north and east sides by public streets designated as Secondary
Arterials in the City of La Quinta General Plan. The segment of Avenue 60 located south of the project
site is designated as a Collector Road.
Access to the Neighborhood Commercial area in Planning Area I is provided by a primary public entry
from Madison Street, two public entries from Avenue 58 and a private access from the Entry Drive.
Entries to residential neighborhoods will be provided from the primary entry drive. Their conceptual
locations are illustrated in Exhibit 3-9.
Non -Vehicular Circulation
Non -vehicular circulation proposed for the project is intended to include multi -use trails, sidewalks,
walk streets, and a boardwalk feature. The features are as follows:
- Multi -Use Trail: An 8 -foot -wide multi -use trail along the main spine road to provide future
neighborhoods with a central bike and pedestrian connection to the resort core as well as the
main entry gate.
- Sidewalk: Sidewalks are included along key streets in the resort core to provide a completely
interconnected pedestrian grid experience so that resort guests can walk or bike to all
activities at the Wave Basin and resort facilities.
- Walk Streets: Designed as narrow walkways between homes, Walk Streets provide
connectivity with immediate residential frontage. The Walk Street network is one of the
primary organizing components of the community plan. Terminating at the boardwalk, Walk
Streets link residents to The Wave Basin, The Farm, and the greater network of trails and
open spaces, enabling movement throughout the community.
- The Boardwalk: The Wave Basin and its integrated pedestrian boardwalk, is the terminus for
nearly all the Walk Streets — functioning as a gathering space as well as an active recreational
amenity.
Exhibit 3-10, Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan, illustrates the proposed locations for the multi -use trail,
connecting boardwalk, sidewalks, and walk streets.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-26 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
• .
OConceptual
Residential Entry Point
3
Conceptual Residential Gated Entry Point
24' Right of Way: Entry Drive
24' Right of Way: Local Road "A"
24' Right of Way: Resort Drive
26' Right of Way: Resort / Commercial Drive
32' Right of Way: Resort / Commercial Drive
40' Right of Way: Entry Drive
40' Right of Way: Resort Drive
60' Right of Way: Resort Drive
..
..
..
AVENUE 58
IRO"
O
Notes:
1. Conceptual residential entry points ■
reflect anticipated locations only.refinement as the project
Entry locations are conceptual and
subject to
is built out.
. .
2. Local Road Sections "B" and "C"
(not shown) may be used in future
development areas.
■
`•♦
■
AVENUE 60
. M.
I
•
■
i
i
■
1
i
i
i�••
l�
1.0 p
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.9
Legend:
•
Project Boundary
•
•
•
•
•
Multi -Use Trail
Connecting Boardwalk Feature
Sidewalk
Walk Street
40+
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
NON -VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PLAN
0
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.10
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.8 Infrastructure Plan
The system planned to serve the project will be designed to provide a coordinated infrastructure and
public services to adequately serve the project area at full buildout. The project will be served by the
following utilities:
• Water and Sewer: Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Electricity: Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• Gas: Southern California Gas Company
Water and Sewer
Water and sewer service for the Specific Plan area is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District
(CVWD). The CVWD provides domestic water from wells. Pursuant to an existing agreement with
CVWD, the project will develop two onsite wells sites, one of which will be equipped with a well
pumping plant as required by CVWD to serve the project. The project will also drill a private well to
provide an additional source of water for non-domestic (outdoor) purposes. The exact location of the
wells and well sites will be subject to CVWD approval. The project proposes to connect to the existing
water lines located on Avenue 58 (north) and Madison Street (east). The proposed water lines will
consist of 18 -inch, 12 -inch, and 8 -inch public water lines. Sewer lines in the area currently exist along
Avenue 58 and along a portion of Avenue 60 (southeast of the project). The project proposes 15 -inch,
12 -inch and 8 -in sewer lines that will connect to the existing sewer lines and provide sewer service to
the project. The project will be required to conform to the requirements of the CVWD's programs and
standards pertaining to water management and conservation. See Exhibit 3-11 for the Conceptual
Water Plan and Exhibit 3-12 for the Conceptual Sewer Plan.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-29 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
•
■w— —
Existing Water Main
OProposed
C.V.W.D. Well Site
Proposed Public 8" Water Main
Proposed Public 12" Water Main
�12W-
Proposed Public 18" Water Main
�18W-
Notes: 1. Information shown is conceptual only.
Final engineering design plans may deviate.
2. Number and location of wells is preliminary &
subject to further discussion with C.V.W.D.
EXHIBIT
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� CONCEPTUAL WATER PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
3.11
Legend:
Project Boundary
•
Existing Sewer Main
— s —
Proposed 8" Sewer Main
Proposed 12" Sewer Main
�12S—
Proposed 15" Sewer Main
�15S—
Note: Information shown is conceptual only.
Final engineering design plans may deviate.
AVENUE 5 8rL___ —ems
AVENUE 60 s— —s—
MSA
s
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� CONCEPTUAL SEWER PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.12
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Grading and Drainage
As shown in Exhibit 3-13, Conceptual Drainage Plan, the project includes a comprehensive drainage
system that collects on- and off-site storm flows, retains the incremental post -development increase
and discharges surface water at pre -development levels to protect individual residences, the resort,
and commercial uses as well as downstream properties. Surface drainage will be conveyed by the
local street system from development areas to a system of basins and underground storm drains. As
illustrated in the conceptual drainage plan, multiple retention basins and lakes (including the Wave
Basin), will be used to convey and safely capture surface flows. Retention basins will be constructed
and sized to retain the worst-case flood volume from a 100- year storm event. These basins will also
include water quality elements that serve as structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) in
accordance with the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS -4) Whitewater River Watershed
Municipal Stormwater Program.
Off -Site Electrical Improvements
Electric utilities for the site are provided by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Expansion of existing
IID facilities, consisting of the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing substation,
and underground conduit and line extensions will be part of the proposed project. Exhibit 3-14, Off -
Site Electrical Improvements, illustrates the location of the existing substation and proposed
distribution line(s) and upgrades.
Other Utilities
The site is within the Southern California Gas Company's service area for natural gas, and Frontier and
Charter Communications for telecommunications. The project will tie into the existing cable, gas and
telecommunications lines located along Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The project will not require
or result in the relocation or construction of new natural gas, or telecommunication facilities.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-32 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
- -
1
Water Feature / Retention
Conceptual Drainage Sub -Area
•
Conceptual 100 -Year Sub -Area Retention
■
Site Drainage Flows
Off -Site Drainage Direction
—>
Note: Drainage and retention is conceptual and subject
to refinement with final engineering design.
•--• ----
i�
m a�
•
1
♦
L;11
I m
Nr
1
1
•=-1- /
I \
---
— ►
-
II .s
AVENUE 60
MSA CONSULTING, INC. / '[ CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.13
Legend:
Project Boundary
Proposed Conduit System
Proposed Transformer Bank
AVENUE 58
PROJECT SITE
r.
EXISTING I.I.D. SUBSTATION —•
1
MN MN
w
LU
0
C)
AVENUE 60
MSA CONSULTING, INC
>
PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
OFF-SITE ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS
0
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
3.14
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.9 Project Implementation
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.
Site Development Permit (SDP): SDPs will be required by the City for final approval of landscape
design, architectural design, and site plans for each phase of development. These may be processed
concurrent with or subsequent to other entitlement approvals. Each SDP will require public hearings
before the 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.
Temporary Use Permit (TUP): TUPs are required by the City to accommodate special, unique, or
limited duration activities that might otherwise be outside the provisions of normal zoning. Temporary
uses are anticipated and allowed by the Specific Plan, subject to the City's TUP requirements [add cite
to Municipal Code]. TUPs are reviewed administratively by the Design and Development Director and
do not require a public hearing.
3.10 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 (EIR 2021020310)
• Adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002)
• Adoption of a Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004)
• Adoption of the Specific Plan Amendment (SP 2019-0003, Amendment V to SP 03-067)
• Adoption of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002)
• Approval of a Tentative Tract Map 37815 (TTM 2019-0005)
• Approval of Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-35 June 2021
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
• Approval of Development Agreement (DA 2021-0002)
Future entitlements, including TTMs, SDPs, CUPs and TUPs will also be considered in the context of
this EIR, and if found consistent, may utilize the EIR in their approval processes, as allowed by CEQA
Section 15162.
3.11 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
requirements. The following are anticipated responsible agencies which may rely on this Draft EIR for
their discretionary approvals required to implement the project:
Imperial Irrigation District
Approval or certification related to any other applicable general order, rule, or regulation concerning
utility modification, conveyance, or delivery.
Coachella Valley Water District
Review and approval of the design and plans for the project's domestic water and wastewater
systems.
Colorado Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 7)
Approval may include but is not limited to: (1) General Construction Stormwater Permit; (2) Standard
Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan; and (3) Submittal of a Recycled Water Report for the use of
recycled water as a dust control measure for construction. Additionally, approval of a Water Quality
Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act may be required to verify compliance with
water quality requirements (waste discharge and water quality).
Riverside County Department of Environmental Health
The Riverside County Department of Health (DEH) will review of Wave Basin plans prior to
construction for compliance with Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The proposed project
will require the storage or handling of hazardous materials, as defined in Chapter 8.64 of the Riverside
County Municipal Code, including pool disinfecting and cleaning supplies. Therefore, under the
administration of the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health (DEH) the project shall
obtain a permit from the DEH and electronically submit a hazardous materials business plan in the
Statewide Informational Management System.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
3-36 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis
Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis
4.1 Introduction
This Draft EIR for the project provides analysis of impacts for 15 environmental resource categories
under CEQA. Sections 4.1 through 4.15 discuss the environmental impacts that may result with
implementation of the project.
4.2 Resource Categories Addressed in the EIR
The following environmental resource categories are addressed in this chapter:
4.1 Aesthetics
4.2 Air Quality
4.3 Biological Resources
4.4 Cultural Resources
4.5 Energy
4.6 Geology and Soils
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.10 Land Use and Planning
4.11 Noise
4.12 Public Services
4.13 Transportation
4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources
4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
The Draft EIR will address all environmental topics, excluding agriculture and forestry resources,
mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, and wildfires. It was determined in the NOP
that these sections would result in no impacts, and therefore, they are not required to be analyzed
further in the Draft EIR. Please consult Appendix A and Chapter 6.0, Effects Found to have No Impact,
of this Draft EIR for an analysis of the environmental topics, and conclusions of the agricultural and
forestry resources, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, and wildfire
environmental topics.
4.3 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4-1 June 2021
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
• Resources
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 site and vicinity.
Regulatory Setting
This section includes the local, state and federal regulatory framework utilized in the analysis.
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, as completely as is feasible,
the significant impacts identified in the EIR. If the EIR identifies any significant unmitigated impacts,
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 requires decision makers approving a project to adopt findings and 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 applicable significance criteria. Thresholds were
developed using criteria from the CEQA Guidelines; State, federal, and local regulatory guidance;
local/regional plans and ordinances; accepted practices; and consultation with recognized experts.
The following adjectives are used specifically to define the degree of impact used in the Impact
Analysis and Mitigation 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4-2 June 2021
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
A "significant" impact is considered a substantial negative effect that exceeds a critical and accepted
threshold for significant adverse environmental effects. 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 15383). As
recommended in the CEQA Guidelines, impacts are also identified as "potentially significant" prior to
mitigation, which is the standard for determining which potential impacts are studied 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;
• Section 15126.2, Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts; and
Each environmental impact discussion assesses project specific environmental effects of the
proposed project.
The results of the impact analyses discussed under each environmental topic were evaluated for
significance relative to thresholds of significance identified at the beginning of each environmental
impact discussion. The thresholds of significance presented are consistent with Appendix G,
Environmental Checklist Form, of the CEQA Guidelines, and where applicable, also includes quantified
performance standards.
Cumulative Impacts
The basis for the cumulative impact analyses provided in this Draft EIR is consistent with Section
15130, Discussion of Cumulative Impacts, of the CEQA Guidelines. In particular, Section 15130
(b)(1)(A) as follows:
The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of
occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as much 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4-3 June 2021
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Mitigation Measures
In some cases, following the impact discussion, reference is made to State and federal regulations
and agency policies that 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, beyond those contained in other documents, are offset with a summary
heading and described using the format presented below:
AES -1 Project -specific mitigation is identified that would reduce the impact to the lowest degree
feasible.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
This section identifies the resulting level of significance of the impact following mitigation.
Resources
This section lists the resources used to write the section. The resources can also be found in Chapter
8.0, References, of this EIR.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4-4 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.1 Aesthetics
4.1 Aesthetics
4,1.1 Introduction
This section of the Coral Mountain Resort Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") describes
the existing aesthetic character of the project site and surrounding area. This section also analyzes
the potential impacts to the aesthetic quality of the site 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 Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, Historical/
Archaeological Resources Survey Report prepared by CRM Tech, Inc. (Appendix E), and a project -
specific Lighting Analysis, prepared by Musco Lighting (Appendix B), as well as other planning
documents and aerial imagery of the project property and surrounding area. Sources used in the
preparation of this section are identified in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this EIR. Please
consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
4.1.2 Existing Conditions
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. 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.
Existing Conditions
The project site is currently a part of the "Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan 03-067", which
occupies approximately 929 acres south of Avenue 58 and east and west of Madison Street. The area
east of Madison Street encompasses the Andalusia Country Club property, and the area west of
Madison Street is currently vacant. Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067 is being processed to
remove the area west of Madison Street from the Specific Plan area, thus, creating two separate and
distinct communities, "Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and "Andalusia Country
Club", east of Madison Street. Approval of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will establish a
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-1 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
new master plan and development standards for the 386 -acre property west of Madison Street to
allow creation of a boutique resort and master -planned community.
Topography
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) makes up the foothills of the
Santa Rosa Mountains, stands approximately 400 feet above mean sea level and is located, in part, at
the southwestern corner of the project site.
Existing Surrounding Character
The existing visual character of the City is both rural and suburban. In La Quinta, the rural visual
character consists of agricultural land uses typically found in the eastern portion of the City and
surrounding area, including within the City's Sphere of Influence. The incorporated 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 built along landscaped boulevards with perimeter walls and landscaping, as well as curb,
gutter and sidewalks. Buildings tend to be low-rise, which preserves views of the surrounding
mountains from private and public lands. An interconnected street system provides accessibility
throughout the City, and, for the most part, streets are developed with sidewalks, curbs, and gutters.
Landscaping along rights-of-way provides visual relief from the built environment and enhances the
visual character of the community (La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report, page III -5).
Project Location
The project site encompasses an area of approximately 929 acres in the southeastern portion of the
City of La Quinta.
The local area is characterized as a developing area with a number of golf course and residential
communities to the north, west, east, and southeast, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and
south, and open space and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) percolation ponds to the
south. In addition to the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south, Coral Mountain is situated
within the southwest portion of the project property.
The approximately 386 -acre portion of the project site, to be developed under SP 2020-0002, is
bounded by vacant land and Avenue 58 on the north; Madison Street on the east; residential estates,
vacant land, and the Avenue 60 alignment on the south; and Coral Mountain, and vacant land to the
west.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-2 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
4.1.3 Regulatory Setting
State
Caltrans State Scenic Highways Program
Caltrans manages the State Scenic Highway Program, provides guidance, and assists local government
agencies, community organizations and citizens with the process to officially designate scenic
highways.
The California Scenic Highway Program was created in 1963 to protect and enhance the natural scenic
beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors, through special conservation treatment. The
Streets and Highways Code, Sections 260 to 263 governs the Scenic Highway Program by establishing
and applying standard for, and undertaking the development of, official scenic highways. The
department must take into consideration the concept of the "complete highway", which is a highway
which incorporates not only safety, utility, and economy, but also beauty. In the development of
official scenic highways, the department must give special attention both to the impact of the highway
on the landscape and to the highway's visual appearance. Per Section 260 of Article 2.5, the
designation of state scenic highways is intended to:
"to assign responsibility for the development of such scenic highways and for the
establishment and application of specific planning and design standards and procedures
appropriate thereto and to indicate, in broad statement terms, the location and extent of
routes and areas requiring continuing and careful co-ordination of planning, design,
construction, and regulation of land use and development, by state and local agencies as
appropriate, to protect the social and economic values provided by the state's scenic
resources."
According to the State Scenic Highway Program Route 62 and 74 are listed as state scenic highways
in the Coachella Valley. Route 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." No scenic highways occur in La Quinta, or near
the project site.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-3 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
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:
- 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.
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 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 designating 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-4 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
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 large commercial centers along
Highway 111, the existing school playfields and recreational facilities, and major arterials.
La Quinta Municipal Code
The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) acts as a regulatory standard, 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 design standards and
guidelines are provided throughout the LQMC. Regulations include:
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.
General requirements include shielding, filtration, and height limitations. To summarize the
ordinance, all exterior illuminating devices, except those 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-5 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
• 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.
LQMC Section 9.50.020, Height limits and setbacks near image corridors, is intended to limit building
heights for residential development in order to facilitate noise screening for residents and preserve
visual openness.
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. Threshold topic "b", involving state scenic highways, is not analyzed in great detail since
screening criterion related to aesthetics concluded that there would be no impacts. 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
The analysis of the potential aesthetic impact of the proposed Coral Mountain Resort project is
provided in the following discussion. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on
information contained in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan. Aesthetic impacts are evaluated by
considering proposed grading, landform alteration, 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 objectively examined to
determine whether development of the project would have significant impacts on the property and
surrounding area.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-6 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Proposed Project
The project proposes a mixed-use development with commercial, residential, resort, and recreational
land uses on approximately 386 acres. The project proposes 60,000 square feet of general retail
buildings on approximately 7.7 acres on the northeast corner of the project; 496 low density
residential units of various product types on approximately 232.3 acres in the northern and eastern
portion of the site; 104 resort residential units, 150 hotel rooms, and 57,000 square feet of private
resort -serving commercial uses on approximately 120.8 acres in the southwest portion of the site
(including a 16.62 -acre artificial Wave Basin); and open space recreational uses (i.e., hiking, biking,
ropes course) on approximately 23.6 acres in the southwestern portion of the site.
In addition to the proposed onsite development, project implementation will also include the
installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58,
as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in
the existing right-of-way.
Character and Development Standards
The project proposes four planning areas, identified as Planning Areas (PA) 1, 11, 111, and IV, on the 386 -
acre property. PA 1 is designated for Neighborhood Commercial (CN); PA II is designated for Low
Density Residential (RL); PA III is designated for Tourist Commercial (CT); and PA IV is designated for
Parks and Recreation (PR). The Specific Plan establishes development standards for the planning areas
in order to achieve the proposed character of the project, which is defined as a high-quality, private
resort community with commercial, residential, and recreational uses. The character proposed for
each planning area and the development standards established in the Specific Plan are provided
below.
PA I
The CN planning area will include both neighborhood- and visitor -serving businesses. In addition to
vehicular access, a multi -use trail will accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access from within the
Coral Mountain Resort communities and from sidewalks on adjoining public streets. Commercial
buildings will be one- to two -stories with pedestrian -level interest or detailing. PA I will be
characterized by small, neighborhood -scale retail buildings; shade devices, such as arcades,
landscaping and building orientation; and the use of paseos, plazas, and courtyards for pedestrian
use. The table below outlines the development standards for PA I.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-7 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4.1-1 Development Standards Planning Area I
Neighborhood Commercial
Project Max/Min
Max. Structure Height
35 ft1,2
Max. No. of Stories
2
Min. Front Setback
10 ft
Min. Rear Setback
10 ft
Min. Parking
1/250 ft GFA.
Max. Building Floor Area in PA I
60,000 SF
Min. Building Setback to Avenue 58
25 ft
Min. Building Setback to Madison Street
25 ft
Min. Setback from Interior Property Line3
0 ft
Min. Building/Landscape Setback from Residential PA'
40 ft/20 ft
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
Max. Light Pole Height
25 ft
Min. Parking Provided
Per Code
Min. Parking Dimension
9' X 19'
Min. Bicycle Parking
Per Code
Min. Golf Cart / NEV Parking
Per Code
Min. Electric Vehicle Charging Spaces
Per Code
Notes:
1. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
2. Architectural and roof projections, such as chimneys, spires, finials and similar features not
providing habitable or otherwise unusable space shall be permitted to extend up to fifteen feet
above the maximum structure height.
3. Mechanical equipment to have a minimum 3 -foot setback from interior property lines.
4. Landscape setback occurs within the building setback.
6. 25 % of Planning Area I is 1.9 acres (7.7 acres x 25%). The property proposes a building floor area of
60,000 square feet, which is approximately 1.4 acres of the site.
7. Five bicycle parking spaces for each tenant having over twenty thousand square feet of gross floor
area.
PA 11
The character of the Low Density Residential Planning Area is defined as "Desert Modern" achieved
through contemporary desert architecture, desert vernacular, and simple interpretations of
agricultural form. Patios, courtyards, arcades, plazas, and outdoor pedestrian areas will assist in
establishing dual indoor- and outdoor -living experience.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-8 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4.1-2 Development Standards Planning Area II
Low Density Residential
Detached
Product
Attached
Product
Accessory
Building
Min. Lot Size
3,600 sf
3,600 sf
Max. Structure Height
32 ft 2,3
32 ft 2,3
28 ft 2,3
Max. No. Of Stories
2
2
2
Min. Area Per Unit
1,400 sf
1,000 sf
250 sf
Min. Front Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Garage —10 ft
Other Structures -3 ft.
Min. Rear Setback
5 ft
5 ft
2 ft
Min. Front/Side Facing Attached
Garage (Carport) Setback
15 ft / 3 ft 5
15 ft / 3 ft 5
Min. Interior/Corner Side Yard
Setback4
5ft/5ft
5ft6/5ft
5ft6/5ft
Min. Building To Building
Setback 6
0 ft
0 ft
0 ft
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
6 ft
6 ft
Max. Parking Required
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
Notes:
1. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
2. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
3. Excluding chimneys, porticos other incidental architectural features etc. may exceed max. structure
height by up to 5 feet.
4. AC units, trellis elements, pools, and spas are allowed to encroach into side and rear setback areas
within 3' of property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Subject to applicable building code requirements
7. -- = Not Applicable
PA 111
The Tourist Commercial Planning Area will house the resort hotel, residential, commercial, and
recreational amenities associated with the resort. The character of PA III will be defined by the various
proposed sub -planning areas (PA III -A through III -G), uses, and development standards that focus on
connectivity and walkability. The planning area will establish neighborhood scale buildings and a
pedestrian -friendly environment that provides shade using arcades, shade devices, landscaping, and
building orientation.
Per Table 4.1-3, below, the tallest pole height for PA III is 80 feet tall, located in Planning Area III -B.
The light poles are proposed around the Wave Basin in order to illuminate the Basin during the
permitted evening hours from dusk until 10:00 p.m. The proposed PA III -B designation is currently
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-9 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
surrounded by vacant and undeveloped land to the north, east, south, and west, with Coral Mountain
also situated to the west. The closest existing developed property to PA III -B is approximately 200 feet
east of the site, north of Avenue 60. Development within PA III -B shall be required to abide by the
building height standards in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, if approved by the La Quinta City
Council. Additional analysis included in discussion d) of this Aesthetics section.
Table 4.1-3 Development Standards Planning Area III
Tourist Commercial
III -A
III -B
III -C
III -D
III -E
III -F
III -G
Min. Lot Size (sf)
20,000
20,000
20,000
3,600
3,600
20,000
20,000
Max. Lot Coverage
50%
10%
70%
70%
70%
50%
70%
Min. Lot Frontage (ft)
25'
25'
25'
30'
30'
25'
25'
Min. Livable Areal (sf)
--
--
--
1,400
1,400
--
--
Min. Accessory Building
Area 2 (sf)
--
--
--
300
300
--
--
Min. Front Setback
10'
0'
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
Min. Setback from Walk
Streets Or Sidewalks 3
5'
0'
5'
5'
5'
5'
--
Min. Setback from Wave
Basin parcel (ft)
0'
--
0'
0'
0'
--
0'
Min. Front Facing
Garage/Carport Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
Min. Side Facing
Garage/Carport Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
Min. Rear Setback4
--
--
--
5'
5'
--
25'
Min. Interior/Corner Side
Setback 45,6
--
__
3'/3'
3'/3'
--
--
Min. Setback from Low -
Density Residential
District (ft)
--
50'
15'
--
--
--
50'
Max. Height 789
(stories/ft)
40/4
45/4
40/3
30/3
30/3
40/3
30/2
Min. Bldg. Separation9
6'
0'
15'
6'
6'
6'
0'
Max Pole Light Height
25'
80'
25'
--
--
40'
40'
Max. Wall Height
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
Min. Parking Provided
1.1 per
key
25
employee
spaces
1 per
500 sf
1 per
bedroom
1 per
bedroom
1 per
500 sf
1 per
1,000 sf
Min. Parking Dimension
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
Notes:
1. Excluding garages, casitas or carriage units
2. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
3. Where walk street occurs at rear or side property line, walk street setback shall govern.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.1-10
June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
4. AC units and other mechanical equipment may encroach within setback up to 3' from property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Excluding chimneys, porticos and other incidental architectural features.
7. Including rooftop deck and terraces (e.g. railings, parapets, furniture, shade structures, umbrellas, stairs, access lifts,
elevator housings, etc.).
8. Subject to applicable building code requirements.
Additional Notes: III -A = Resort; III -B = The Wave; III -C = Wave Club; III -D = Resort Residential West; III -E = Resort
Residential East; III -F = The Farm; III -G = Back of House. -- = Not Applicable
PA IV
PA IV proposes open space uses with active -recreational, and ancillary uses compatible with the
resort. Uses will include hiking trails, biking trails, and a ropes course and zipline. The character of PA
IV will be defined by native undisturbed landscape (to be maintained as existing landscape and
preserved as open space), with revegetated areas to enhance the desert landscape. The recreational
structures will also contribute to the character of PA IV.
Table 4.1-4 Development Standards Planning Area IV
Parks and Recreation
Max./Min.
Min. Building Site
--
Min. Lot Frontage
--
Max. Structure Height
12 ft
Max. Height - Ropes Course/Zipline
50 ft
Max. Height — Other Recreational Equipment
20 ft
Max. Building Coverage in PA IV
5,000 sf
Max. Number of Stories
1
Min. Setback from Property Line
10 ft
Note: -- = Not Applicable
The City Zoning Code establishes building standards required for all land uses. The Specific Plan
proposes building heights that exceed the maximum building heights established in the City's
Municipal Code. Building heights in the SP exceed the Municipal Code's in the RL, CT, and PR zones
proposed for the project. Building heights for the project will range from one-, to four-story buildings,
depending on the specific planning area and associated zone, and 50 feet in the PA IV for recreational
facilities. The building height per zone (both existing and proposed) is depicted in Table 4.1-5 below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-11 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4.1-5 Proposed Zones and Building Heights
Zone
PA
Land Use
Max. Building
Height per Zoning
Max. Building Height
Per SP
Neighborhood
Commercial (CN)
I
General Commercial
35 ft. (2 stories)
35 ft. (2 stories)1,2
Low Density
Residential
II
Low Density
Residential
28 ft. (2 stories)
32 ft (2 stories)
Accessory building 28 ft
(2 stories)1' 3
Tourist
Commercial (CT)
III
Tourist Commercial
(Resort)
40 ft. (3 stories)
PA III -A 40 ft. (4 stories)4
PA III -B 45 ft. (4 stories)
PA III -C 40 ft. (3 stories)
PA III -D 30 ft. (3 stories)
PA III -E 30 ft. (3 stories)
PA III -F 40 ft. (3 stories)
PA III -G 30 ft. (2 stories)
Parks and
Recreation
IV
Open Space
Recreation
28 ft. (2 stories)
12 ft.
50 ft. (Ropes Course /
Zipline)
20 ft. (Other Recreational
Facilities)
1. Height is limited to 22 feet within 150 feet of Madison and Avenue 58 right-of-way (R.O.W.)
2. Architectural and roof projections, such as chimneys, spires, finials and similar features not providing habitable
or otherwise unusable space shall be permitted to extend up to fifteen feet above the maximum structure
height.
3. Accessory buildings include detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units. Excluding chimneys,
porticos other incidental architectural features etc. may exceed maximum structure height by up to 5 feet.
4. Maximum structure height throughout the Tourist Commercial land use designation varies depending on the
Planning Area (A through G).
Per Table 4.1-5, the tallest building height permitted on the project property is located within the
Tourist Commercial (CT) zone, specifically PA 111 B (the Wave Basin), allowing the maximum building
height of 45 feet, or four -stories. PA 111 B is proposed to be situated in the southwest portion of the
project property, set back a minimum of 700 feet from the arterial roadways at the perimeter of the
site, i.e., Madison Street, Avenue 58, or Avenue 60. The remaining uses within the Tourist Commercial
zone are also located substantial distances from the perimeter of the site and comply with the City's
established height limits. The proposed Tourist Commercial designation is currently surrounded by
vacant and undeveloped land and Coral Mountain. The closest existing developed property is a
residential estate approximately 630 feet southeast of the proposed PA 111 B area. A low density, single
family community (Tract 33597) was recorded in 2017 creating 57 lots at the southwest corner of
Madison Street and Avenue 60, south of the project. Development within the CT zone shall be
required to abide by the building height standards in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, if
approved by the La Quinta City Council.
The tallest structure is proposed in Planning Area IV, zoned Parks and Recreation. PA IV proposes 50 -
foot structures for the ropes course and zipline facilities. The proposed Parks and Recreation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-12 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
designation is currently surrounded by vacant and undeveloped land to the north, east, and south,
and Coral Mountain to the west. The closest existing developed property to PA IV is approximately
0.40 miles north of the site, north of Avenue 58. The vacant lots located north of the project and
south on Avenue 58 are designated for low density residential and medium/high density residential
developments. It is anticipated that development will likely occur on these properties in the future.
Development within the PR zone shall be required to abide by the building height standards in the
Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, if approved by the La Quinta City Council. The development
standards in the SP are also applicable to the proposed developments within the Neighborhood
Commercial and Low -Density Residential zones within the project property.
In summary, as demonstrated in Table 4.1-5, the RL, CT, and PR zones in the proposed Specific Plan
will exceed the maximum building height standards permitted within the City's existing Low Density
Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Parks and Recreation zones to the extent described above.
Circulation
The circulation plan for the project proposes a multi -modal approach providing transportation
facilities within the Specific Plan area for a variety of user groups including motorists, cyclists,
pedestrians, and drivers of electric vehicles, thereby decreasing automobile dependency. Convenient
access and parking are planned in close proximity to retail and resort areas. 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's multi -modal transportation
system will consist of sidewalks, multi -use trails, and shared use of low -speed, low-volume roadways,
specifically including: off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths/routes; sidewalks in higher traffic areas;
pedestrian/bicycle crosswalks; pedestrian and multi -use paths and streets; traffic calming methods;
short street segments with frequent caution zones and stopping points; and golf cart routes and other
alternative forms of personal transportation.
Vehicular circulation is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-2, Vehicular Circulation Plan, and non -vehicular
circulation is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-3, Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-13 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
Planning Area Boundary
- — — — -
Planning Area Sub -Boundary
Neighborhood Commercial
Low Density Residential
Resort
Open Space (Recreation)
■ ■
MI . - .. _ ■ ■ - . ■
AVENUE 58
PA II
LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL •Z
■
■
I
•
PA I
OPEN SP
CE
..
..
AVENUE 60
PA II
• I
■
l�
`N
m
■-1
i
1
i
■
1
i
i
i�
•
0 RI
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC. / '[ PLANNING AREA LAND USE PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-1
Legend:
Project Boundary
• .
OConceptual
Residential Entry Point
3
Conceptual Residential Gated Entry Point
24' Right of Way: Entry Drive
24' Right of Way: Local Road "A"
24' Right of Way: Resort Drive
26' Right of Way: Resort / Commercial Drive
32' Right of Way: Resort / Commercial Drive
40' Right of Way: Entry Drive
40' Right of Way: Resort Drive
60' Right of Way: Resort Drive
..
..
..
AVENUE 58
■
1
■
■
Notes:
1. Conceptual residential entry points ■
reflect anticipated locations only.
Entry locations are conceptual and
subject to refinement as the project
is built out. ■
2. Local Road Sections "B" and "C" ■
(not shown) may be used in future
development areas.
. .
. IN - • .
•
•
•
. -.. -. M.
■
`•♦
■
AVENUE 60
■
i
i
i
1.0 p
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PLAN
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-2
Legend:
•
Project Boundary
•
•
•
•
•
Multi -Use Trail
Connecting Boardwalk Feature
Sidewalk
Walk Street
A VENUE
/
1
1
1
1
. .
AVENUE 60
1►0 RI
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
NON -VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PLAN
0
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-3
4.1 AESTHETICS
Design Guidelines
In order to illustrate the design expectations of the project and their impacts to scenic quality, a list
of the design guidelines, as established in Chapter 4 of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan are
summarized below. Chapter 4 outlines the design guidelines for the various planning areas for the
project to assist the developer of the Specific Plan project to execute a built environment that
incorporates the following main concepts:
• Develop a private resort that includes recreational amenities, retail shops and dining venues.
• Establish residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use trails that connect
neighborhoods throughout the project. "Walk Streets" will provide internal connection
between facilities within the Resort and the Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods.
• Develop buildings which respond to the desert environment and utilize passive heating /
cooling techniques through orientation and design.
• Incorporate a variety of open space and recreational uses (active and passive).
• Design a planned community that complements existing development in the surrounding area
and is compatible with the surrounding environment.
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project and creates a landmark facility that will
enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
• Develop a community that is visually attractive and captures the essence of the Coral
Mountain landscape.
• Embrace "Desert Modern" as the over -arching architectural theme for the entire project. The
intent of this broad theme is to encourage creativity, flexibility, variability, diversity and
individuality when considering the architectural design of buildings within the development.
The design guidelines for the four proposed planning areas are provided below:
Planning Area I — Neighborhood Commercial
Located on 7.7 acres at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, PA I allows for the
construction of 60,000 square feet of publicly accessible neighborhood commercial building space
with affiliated circulation and infrastructure improvements. The retail development will consist of a
mixture of neighborhood commercial and resort -related commercial development. The following
principles, regarding design, were established for PA I:
• Streets will maintain a narrow road profile with on -street parking to help slow traffic and
encourage walking or electric cart circulation.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-17 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
• Utilize smaller, neighborhood -scale retail buildings to create a walkable, pedestrian -friendly
environment.
• Shade and pedestrian comfort will be provided through the use of arcades, shade devices,
landscaping, and building orientation.
• Special areas such as paseos, plazas, and courtyards shall be created to further enhance the
pedestrian scale of the commercial area and to provide comfortable spaces for outdoor dining.
• Provide flexibility in commercial architecture to encourage creative and innovative retail
concepts.
Materials
■ Natural stone, stucco, architectural concrete, pre -finished metal panels, cementitious panels
or siding, and thermally -modified wood siding may be utilized as the finish material for vertical
surfaces in a range of natural colors which complement the desert landscape.
■ Roofing products may be selected from a variety of metal profiles like corrugated or standing
seam as well as a variety of membrane roofs.
o The colors of the roofing materials shall conform to a range of lighter tones to reduce
heat gain such as white, sand, and gray.
■ Roof mounted photo -voltaic solar panels may be used throughout the Project.
Planning Area 11— Low Density Residential
Located on approximately 232.3 acres on the northern and eastern portions of the project, PA II
allows for the construction of up to 496 single-family attached and detached dwellings. Residential
neighborhoods of various types would occur throughout the project. Product types may include
estate compounds, single-family detached/attached units, alley loaded homes, and clustered
products. Ownership and occupancy of these units may include primary, secondary and fractional
ownership, along with short term vacation rentals. Open space, golf, and various other
complementary recreational uses may be integrated with residential development.
The design intent for PA II is to create residential neighborhoods that maximize privacy between
individual homes while incorporating the desert landscape. Residential design may be reflective of
contemporary desert architecture, desert vernacular, and simple interpretations of agricultural form.
Spanish Colonial, Moorish, or other historically themed architectural styles should be avoided, to
maintain the "Desert Modern" theme for the project. The proposed design goals in PA II will be guided
by the following principles:
• The placement of structures should consider prevalent environmental conditions including sun
orientation, prevailing winds, and desired views.
• Orientation of residential development edges should maximize view potential and access to
natural open areas and recreation areas.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-18 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
• Varying house configurations are encouraged to promote variety in the street scene.
• A combination of side -entering and front -entering garages with varied driveway locations are
encouraged in order to interrupt repetitive curb cuts and yard patterns.
• Recreation areas/greenbelt features shall be, wherever feasible, visible upon entry to
neighborhoods to enhance neighborhood value.
Materials
■ Natural stone, stucco, architectural concrete, pre -finished metal panels, cementitious panels
or siding, and thermally -modified wood siding may be utilized as the finish material for vertical
surfaces in a range of natural colors which complement the desert landscape.
■ Roofing products may be selected from a variety of metal profiles like corrugated or standing
seam as well as a variety of membrane types.
o The colors of the roofing materials shall conform a range of lighter tones to reduce
heat gain such as white, sand, and gray.
■ Roof mounted photo -voltaic solar panels may be used throughout the project.
Massing and Scale
■ Residences will be broken down into a collection of smaller building forms to avoid a singular
massing expression.
■ Courtyards are encouraged as an effective way to engage the desert landscape while reducing
the apparent mass of a home.
■ Stand alone casitas or guest houses as well as detached garages are encouraged.
■ Buildings shall be primarily one-story in scale with secondary two-story elements.
■ Porches, loggias, trellises, and brise-soleil are encouraged to provide solar control and create
opportunities to express crafted details.
Architecture
Residences should express the individuality of the homeowner with the intent of creating a place
instead of a Project. A variety of architectural designs are preferred. Further, special consideration
should be given to passive solar building orientation in order to develop custom homes that perform
efficiently in the desert environment.
Planning Area 111— Tourist Commercial
Planning Area III (PA -III) is intended to allow for resort, resort residential, and resort commercial uses
and is located in the south-central portion of the project. PA -III is structured around the Wave Basin,
a private artificial wave generating basin. Located on approximately 120.8 acres, PA -III will allow the
construction of a mixed-use private resort including the surf Wave Basin, 150 hotel keys, 104
residential units, and 57,000 square feet of resort -serving commercial and recreational building
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-19 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
space, outdoor amenities, and a community clubhouse. Planning Area III is divided into seven planning
subareas (A through G).
The following principles shall be used in the design and development of the Tourist Commercial
planning area:
• Create a casual and comfortable neighborhood scale within a walkable, pedestrian friendly
environment.
• Establish a "Main Street" feel with emphasis toward on -street parking.
• Encourage a variety of small boutique retailers to enhance the resort experience.
• Maintain flexibility to encourage creative and innovative resort concepts.
Materials
■ Architecture shall defer to the desert landscape with natural textures, tones, and materials
native to the Coachella Valley.
■ Bright vibrant colors, echoing desert wildflowers and artistic interpretations of the desert
landscape, are encouraged.
■ An eclectic variety of high-performance materials ranging from cast or rammed earth to
board -formed concrete and stucco or thermally -modified wood will be used. There will not be
a predominant exterior building material for the project.
■ Natural stone, pre -finished metal panels, and cementitious panels or siding may also be
utilized as the finish material for vertical surfaces in a range of natural colors which
complement the desert landscape.
■ Roof colors ranging from gray, beige, white, sand, taupe, or natural metals such as raw
aluminum and bonderized steel provide a range of lighter color options compatible with the
desert landscape while reducing heat gain.
■ Roof materials shall be selected for high-performance characteristics in a variety of profiles
like corrugated or standing seam metal as well as a variety of membrane roofs such as TPO
Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) or Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC).
■ Roof mounted photo -voltaic solar panels and roof mounted evaporative cooling mechanical
equipment with proper screening may be used throughout PA -III.
■ Reclaimed or pre -weathered wood, tile, concrete block, and oxidized steel shall be
appropriately incorporated as accent materials and be consistent with the architectural style
of the resort.
Massing and Scale
■ Buildings with small footprints shall be used as an integral part of the site planning design to
provide open view corridors to the Wave Basin.
■ Building faces shall be offset from each other to highlight the spaces in between and clarify
pedestrian nodes.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-20 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
■ Offset building corners provide subtle articulation.
■ The massing strategy shall consist of an eclectic mix of primarily one- and two-story building
heights and roof forms.
■ Architectural projections, overhangs, and recesses shall be used to provide shadow,
articulation, and scale to building elevations.
■ Roof decks and terraces are encouraged to provide visual interest as well as activity above the
street level. This may be accomplished with step -backs in the second level massing.
■ A mix of roof forms from flat, parapet, ramped, shed, and gable create visual interest to the
roofscape in the resort.
■ Buildings shall incorporate, passive solar orientation and active technologies to respond to the
desert climate of the Coachella Valley.
■ The majority of the buildings will be one-story with small footprints and pedestrian level
interest or details.
■ A multi -story hotel shall be the dominant building mass and neighborhood landmark.
■ Avoiding visual monotony, buildings with small footprints create a porous or open edge
condition to the Wave Basin and allow pedestrians to wander casually between structures.
■ Porches, trellises, and brise-soleil break up the building mass at the pedestrian level while
providing shelter or relief from the intense desert sun as viewed from the street.
■ Porches, trellises, and brise-soleil provide visual setbacks for the hotel on front, side, and rear
elevations.
■ Side elevations should provide an appropriate level of articulation for secondary facades from
the neighborhood perspective and pedestrian experience.
■ A variety of roof forms from flat to ramped and gabled, should create visual interest
reinforcing the eclectic nature of the resort.
■ Repetition and variation are common themes in design and will be evaluated for visual interest
with the roof scape throughout the resort.
Architecture
The architectural character for the project is "Desert Modern." A variety of different building types
will highlight an eclectic combination of materials and form. Sustainability, durability, and
individuality are important factors to consider when designing buildings for Tourist Commercial uses.
The resulting architecture should reinforce the idea of creating a place, not a project, and be fully
integrated into the planning, landscape, and programming of Coral Mountain Resort.
Planning Area IV — Open Space Recreational
PA IV will be retained as natural open space, that may also be used for low -impact active and passive
recreation activities, such as hiking, biking, and ropes courses. The maximum height of the proposed
ropes course will be 50 feet. Other recreational equipment shall be a maximum of 20 feet in height.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-21 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Offsite Infrastructure
The project will be required to install twelve, 6 -inch conduits along Avenue 58 to bring additional
power to the site and install a transformer bank at IID's existing substation yard located at Avenue 58
and Monroe Street. The offsite improvements for the conduit system will take place in the right of
way, on both sides of Avenue 58, between Andalusia and PGA West, and end on Madison Street.
Avenue 58 is an improved road and classified as a secondary arterial. These improvements would be
installed during Phase I of the development.
Project Impacts
According to the CEQA Guidelines' 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?
Natural scenic vistas can be influenced both negatively and positively by man-made features.
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 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.
To avoid the negative impacts new development can potentially inflict on scenic vistas, the LQGP
establishes policies and programs to reduce impacts on aesthetic resources. These include policies
preserving open space areas, limiting the height of buildings adjacent to scenic corridors, and the
implementation of development standards to reduce impacts from new or redeveloped projects on
adjacent lands. Further, Title 9, Zoning, in the La Quinta Municipal Code (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 Standards implement appropriate standards and
guidelines for land uses within the City General Plan.
According to the La Quinta 2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR), 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. The natural features, which include the Santa Rosa,
San Jacinto and Little San Bernardino Mountains, are considered scenic vistas within the City to the
views and picturesque landscapes they provide when observed from the valley floor. The tallest
mountain range in the area is the San Jacinto Mountains, west of the City. Mount San Jacinto 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-22 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Additional mountains providing a visual resource to the City include the San Bernardino Mountains
to the northwest, and the Indio Hills to the northeast and east. From the project property, views north
and northeast, of the San Jacinto, Little San Bernardino, and San Bernardino Mountains and Indio Hills
are obstructed by existing natural features, developed properties and landscaping.
The Santa Rosa Mountains lie adjacent to the western and southern boundaries of La Quinta and
exceed 8,000 feet in elevation, forming a dramatic backdrop for the City and the project site. Coral
Mountain contributes to the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains and is located within La Quinta's
City boundary and within the project site. Rising approximately 400 feet above sea level, Coral
Mountain sits adjacent to the project's southwestern boundary. Adjacent to the project site, views of
the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south and of Coral Mountain are currently unobstructed
from public view, except at the lowest elevations where trees and other vegetation partially obstruct
existing views from the perimeter of the site.
In order to evaluate the project's impacts on the scenic vista of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa
Mountains, which are both significant scenic vistas in the City, line of sight analyses and visual
simulations were prepared in order to analyze the impacts of the proposed structures and buildings
on views of Coral Mountain when perceived at various points along the surrounding public rights-of-
way. Analysis of the impacts to scenic vistas are provided below.
Location "A"
Line of Sight
Line of sight section "A" is located on Avenue 58, approximately 600 feet west of the project's
northwestern -most boundary. Currently, views of Coral Mountain to the southwest are only
obstructed by existing trees and other vegetation at its base at this location since the properties south
of Avenue 58, in and out of the project site are vacant and undeveloped. As indicated in Exhibit 4.1-
4, Line of Sight Section "A": View from Avenue 58, the midrange and peak locations of Coral
Mountain is still visible to motorists and pedestrians traveling along Avenue 58. As displayed in Exhibit
4.1-4, the base of Coral Mountain, which is currently obstructed by existing vegetation, would be
obstructed by the proposed low density residential structures proposed in Planning Area II. Views of
the mid-range and top of Coral Mountain will remain.
Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the southwest are distant and largely unobstructed. Similar to
the views of Coral Mountain at this location, the views of the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains are
obstructed by existing vegetation; however, the mid-range and peak views of the Santa Rosa
Mountains are visible at this location. Development of the proposed project would not result in
significant impacts to views of the Santa Rosa Mountains, due to the distance between the viewing
location and the project structures, which will include only single family homes up to 22 feet in height;
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-23 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
and the higher and large mass of the Mountains. The Santa Rosa Mountain's mid-range and peaks
would remain visible to pedestrians and motorists at this location, as shown in Exhibit 4.1-5.
Visual Simulation
At this location, the view from Avenue 58 does not change. This is indicated in Exhibit 4.1-5, Visual
Simulation Viewpoint "A": View from Avenue 58. The project boundary does not front Avenue 58
here but lies approximately 1,100 feet to the south. Project features are screened by distance and
surface vegetation with no appreciable change in mountain views. Eventual development of the
intervening lands north of the project site and south of Avenue 58 could cause view limitations due
to their proximity to the roadway, but are not part of the proposed project, and would not contribute
to the project's impacts on views of Coral Mountain.
Distant views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the southwest are visible. The views of the base of the
Santa Rosa Mountains are obstructed by existing vegetation and Coral Mountain; however, the mid-
range and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible at this location. As illustrated in Exhibit
4.1-5, development of the proposed project would not impact the existing views of the Santa Rosa
Mountains from this location.
Location "8"
Line of Sight
Line of sight section "B" is located on Avenue 58 at the Lion's Gate entry. Lion's Gate is a residential
community consisting of single-family residential buildings on the north side of Avenue 58. Similar to
location "A", the base of Coral Mountain is obstructed by existing vegetation within the project area,
but the majority of the Mountain is visible from Avenue 58. With development of the proposed
project, views observed by a motorist at this location would include the top of Coral Mountain, as
well as perimeter landscaping, a perimeter wall, and residential houses. The top portion of an 80 -foot
light pole may be within the line of sight in this location, as illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-6, Line of Sight
Section "8": View from Lion's Gate. However, the light pole would be located approximately 4,000
feet from the Lion's Gate location, and thus would not be visible to the naked eye. Additionally, the
light poles would be obstructed by the proposed perimeter landscaping and single-family residential
homes in their foreground. Finally, in comparison to the mass and scale of Coral Mountain, the light
poles would not significantly impact the motorist's or pedestrian's view of the Mountain at this
location. The base and mid-range views of Coral Mountain would be partially obstructed by the
proposed perimeter landscaping and wall, as well as the proposed low density residential structures,
southwest of the Lion's Gate entry. Although the base and mid-range views of Coral Mountain would
be impacted, the peak views of Coral Mountain would remain visible to motorists and pedestrians
situated at the Lion's Gate entry, as indicated in Exhibit 4.1-6.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-24 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Visual Simulation
As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-7, Visual Simulation Viewpoint 'B": View from Lion's Gate, the project
fronts Avenue 58. There will be a 6 -foot wall and landscaping along the public street, similar to the
existing surrounding residential communities and consistent with City of La Quinta requirements.
Additionally, the existing utility poles at the project's frontage will be placed underground, which is
considered an enhancement of the view from this location. Higher project features (hotel and light
poles) are approximately 4,000 feet from this location, at the base of Coral Mountain. These are not
visible above the perimeter wall in the foreground and are further obstructed by landscape and
residential homes. When viewed from the Lion's Gate entry, the mid-range views of Coral Mountain
would be impacted by the new perimeter landscaping, walls, and residential structures proposed for
the project. However, the mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.
Currently, the Santa Rosa Mountains are largely visible and unobstructed at the Lion's Gate entry
location. As indicated in Exhibit 4.1-7, perimeter landscaping and residential buildings will result in
the partial obstruction of mid-range views of the Santa Rosa Mountains, as well as the loss of views
of the Santa Rosa Mountains observed east of Coral Mountain from this location. As illustrated in
Exhibit 4.1-7, the perimeter trees and residential structures contribute to the obstructed views east
of Coral Mountain. These views are dependent on the location of perimeter trees as well as the mass
of the tree's canopy and the distance to the perimeter wall and residences. Therefore, the project
would be required to implement Mitigation Measure AES -1, which requires the perimeter walls to
be setback from the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30
feet (10 feet more than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review
and approval of final perimeter wall and landscape plans, and Mitigation Measure AES -2, which
requires a minimum setback of 75 feet between any residential structure and the Madison Street and
Avenue 58 public rights-of-way. Although the implementation of Mitigation Measures AES -1 and
AES -2 would reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible, development of the proposed project
would result in significant impacts due to partially obstructing the existing views of Coral Mountain
and the Santa Rosa Mountains at the Lion's Gate entry.
Location "C"
Line of Sight
Line of sight section "C" is located at the Andalusia Country Club entry point at Madison Street, east
of the project boundary. At this location, the line of sight will be obstructed by the perimeter wall,
which will be visible to motorists or pedestrians looking at Coral Mountain. The larger structures of
the hotel and 80 -foot light poles will not be visible, due to distance (3,560 feet) from these facilities
and intervening development, as illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-8, Line of Sight Section "C": View from
Andalusia Entry. At this location, views of the Mountain's midrange and peaks are currently visible to
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-25 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
motorists and pedestrians. Exhibit 4.1-8 indicates that the midrange and peak views of Coral
Mountain would remain in the motorist's line of sight at the Andalusia entry.
Visual Simulations
The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-9, views of
Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains at the Andalusia entry are largely unobstructed in the
site's existing condition. Existing vegetation obstructs views of the base of the mountains. There will
be a 6 -foot perimeter wall and perimeter landscaping along the public street. Higher project features
(hotel and light poles) are approximately 3,560 feet away from this location, at the base of Coral
Mountain. The hotel and light poles are not visible above the community wall in the foreground and
are further obstructed by landscape and residential homes. As shown in the lower left-hand visual
simulation from Viewpoint "C," the hotel and light poles would barely be visible even without the
perimeter wall. Coral Mountain, when viewed at this location, is obstructed by the proposed
perimeter landscaping and residential structures. Therefore, the proposed project would have a
significant impact on the existing views of Coral Mountain when viewed from the Andalusia entry.
However, the midrange and peak views of the Santa Rosa Mountains remain visible at this location
due to the size and distance of the Mountains. The Santa Rosa Mountain panorama and ridgelines
remain visible. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-9, Visual Simulation Viewpoint "C": View from
Andalusia Entry. Project -related impacts to the scenic vistas would be reduced to the maximum
extent feasible through the implementation of Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2, because the
increased setbacks between the public rights-of-way and the perimeter wall and residences will
reduce the impacts on existing views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains. However,
impacts to views of Coral Mountain cannot be reduced to less than significant levels, and would
remain significant and unavoidable.
Location "D"
Line of Sight
Line of sight section "D" is located at the southeast property boundary at Madison Street. From this
location, views of Coral Mountain are currently unobstructed. Development of the 6 -foot perimeter
wall and perimeter landscaping would block any views of the proposed hotel and the light poles, and
of Coral Mountain. The proposed hotel and the 80 -foot light poles would be located approximately
2,745 feet from the viewpoint at location "D", as illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-10, Line of Sight Section
"D": View from Madison Street, making them unidentifiable due to distance.
Visual Simulation
The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. There will be a 6 -foot perimeter wall and
perimeter landscaping along the public street. Beyond the wall, residential units are proposed. Similar
to location C, higher project features (hotel and light poles) are approximately 2,745 feet away from
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-26 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
this location, at the base of Coral Mountain. The poles are barely visible even without the community
wall in the foreground, and would be completely blocked by perimeter landscape and residential
homes. Coral Mountain, when viewed from Madison Street, will be impacted by the proposed
perimeter landscaping and residential structures. Therefore, the proposed project would have a
significant impact on the existing views of Coral Mountain when viewed from Madison Street. Project -
related impacts to the views of Coral Mountain would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible
through the implementation of Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2, because the increased
setbacks between the public rights-of-way and the perimeter wall and residences will reduce the
impacts on existing views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains. However, impacts would
remain significant.
The Santa Rosa Mountains are visible beyond Coral Mountain within the viewshed at this location,
and the proposed project will not impact views of the Santa Rosa Mountains at this location. The
ridgeline views of the Santa Rosa Mountains remain visible at this location due to the size and distance
of the Mountains. The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible. This is illustrated in Exhibit
4.1-11, Visual Simulation Viewpoint "D": View from Madison Street.
Location "E"
Line of Sight
Line of sight section "E" is located on Avenue 60, approximately 600 feet east of the project's
southeastern -most point, and 900 feet southeast of the project's perimeter wall. From this location,
views of Coral Mountain's base and mid-range are largely obstructed by existing landscaping and
vegetation. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-12, Line of Sight Section "E": From Avenue 60. The top of the
closest 80 -foot light pole would be located within the line of sight of a motorist at this location. The
light pole would be located approximately 1,274 feet from the motorist. However, due to the distance
from the viewpoint to the light pole, as well as the limited scale of the light pole and the existing off-
site trees that obstruct views from this location, the light poles would not significantly disrupt the
views observed at this location, if they are visible at all. Also due to distance, the other project
features in PA III, including the resort hotel, resort commercial, or facilities associated with the Wave
Basin will not perceptibly modify the views as they currently occur. Views of Coral Mountain and the
Santa Rosas would be unaffected at this location, and impacts to scenic vistas would be less than
significant.
Visual Simulations
The project boundary does not front Avenue 60 at this location but lies approximately 900 feet to the
northwest. The nearest light pole is approximately 1,274 feet from the viewpoint location and is
largely blocked by an existing palm grove on a neighboring property. The existing vegetation will also
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-27 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
obstruct views of the facilities associated with the Wave Basin, the resort hotel, and resort
commercial uses proposed in PA III.
Views of Coral Mountain's base and midrange are currently obstructed by vegetation associated with
an existing residential property. With the superimposition of the project features, the peak and
ridgeline of Coral Mountain remains visible with no appreciable change. This is illustrated in Exhibit
4.1-13, Visual Simulation Viewpoint "E": From Avenue 60. The Santa Rosa Mountains are located
south of this location, and therefore, views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are not impacted at this
location.
Overall, the proposed project would result in impacts to existing views of Coral Mountain from three
of the five sample viewpoints (B, C and D), as indicated in the line of sight analysis and visual
simulations of the five locations surrounding the project site. Views of Coral Mountain are unaffected
at the Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 locations; partially obstructed at the Lion's Gate entry; and fully
obstructed at the Andalusia entry and Madison Street location. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains
are largely unobstructed by the proposed project, except for the Lion's Gate location, which is
partially obstructed by proposed perimeter landscaping and residential homes. However, due to the
size and distance of the Santa Rosa Mountains in relation to Coral Mountain, the midrange and peaks
of the Santa Rosa Mountains remain visible. While the project's impacts to views of Coral Mountain
are considered significant, it is important to note that any development of the project site, including
the low density residential development currently allowed in the Andalusia Specific Plan and in the
City's General Plan, would require perimeter walls and landscaping and would have the same impacts
on views of Coral Mountain. The proposed change in land uses from the existing entitlements,
including the Wave Basin and hotel, will not have any significant impacts on scenic vistas because of
their distance from perimeter roads and intervening vegetation.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-28 June 2021
Ex. Mountain Peak
41 �
`Line of Sight _ 1
\
Mew Peak)
N.T.S.
PLAN VIEW
N.T.S
Prop. Single Family Residence(s)
See Detail 'A'
■
Prop. Single Family
Residence
■ 1
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION
N.T.S
✓
I
1
L
✓
1
-Single Family Residence
1.701' TO VIEWING LOCAPON
Line of Sight
▪ DETAIL 'A'
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
N.T.S.
t
Line of Sight
. . .
DETAIL 'B'
AVENUE 58
(Public Road)
Line of Sighs (View Peak)
Ex. Boundary & Prop. Wok
ANNUM
MINIMUM
--as-:
bne of Sight
1
J
See Detail'8'
Avenue
58
Lbhc Road)
•
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION "A": VIEW FROM AVENUE 58
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-4
EXISTING CONDITION
Note:
At this location, the view from Avenue 58 does not change. The project boundary does not front Avenue 58 here but lies approximately
0.30 miles to the south. Therefore, there would be no new community wall, landscaping, or utility undergrounding along the pubffc road.
Project features are screened by distance and surface vegetation with no appreciable change In mountain views.
N.T.S.
VISUAL SIMULATION
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "A": VIEW FROM AVENUE 58
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-5
Lion's Gate
AVENUE 58 Prop View Location
Prop. line of ht
„ELK Mountain Peak
N.T.S.
Line Sight (View Peak)
PLAN VIEW
N.T.S
\— Ex. Mountain Side See Detail 'A'
r Line of sight
\ 1
� Prop. Wave Basin Light
INI
- t- ttttttttttttttttttttttt� t- ttttttttttttttttttttttt� -
i
i
L
4,002'TO VIEWING LOCA110N
Line of Sight
Prop. Wave Basin Light
Prop. Wave Basin
DETAIL 'A'
WAVE BASIN / LIGHT
(Public Road)
1._ Prop. Right of Way
1 Line of Sight (View Peak)
Prop. Perimeter Tree
t ...
1
ttttttttttttttttt� IN ttttttttttttttttttttttt� t� ttttttttttttttttttttttt� t� tttttttttttttttttttttttt� t�
- Prop. 6' Perimeter Wall
NI
DETAIL 'B'
AVENUE 58 / LION'S GATE ENTRY
(Public Road)
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION
N.T.S
r line of Sight —
Line of Sight Peak)
l
See Detail '5'
■
Lion's Gate
Er
s ay 1
Avenue 58
(Public Road)
•
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-6
EXISTING CONDITION
Note:
The project fronts Avenue 58. There will be a 6 -foot wall and landscaping
along the public street, similar to the existing surrounding residential
communities. Additionally. the existing utility poles at the projects frontage
will be placed underground. Higher project Features (hotel and light poles)
are approximately 0.75 miles from this location, at the base of Coral
Mountain. These are not visible above the perimeter wall in the
foreground and are further screened by landscape and residential homes.
The mountain panorama and ndgelines remain visible.
N.T.S.
VISUAL SIMULATION
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSING
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "B": VIEW FROM LION'S GATE
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-7
PLAN VIEW
N.T.S
Ex. Mountain Peak z_Line=f Sight View Peak)
\ \ Ex. Mountain Side
Line of Sight
N.T.S.
r
L
See Detail'A'
FmcLine of Sight
I
I
I
I
IL
Prop. Wave Basin
•
. •
•
3,563' TO VIEWING LOCATION _
1
— Prop. Wave Bonin Light
Prop. Hotel -\
1
aI
J
DETAIL 'A'
WAVE BASIN / LIGHT
N.T.S.
I--
— Prop. Right of Way Line of Sight (View Peak)
T. �.a.
Line of Sight
Prop. Perimeter Wall =i Urih1
L Prop. 6' Perimeter Wall
• IN IMI • • MI MI 1
1
1
�.-
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION
N.T.S
DETAIL 'B'
ANDALUSIA ENTRY / MADISON STREET
(Public Road)
See Detail'8'
'1
r line n=sigh =
•fJ�
Line ofSight Mew Peak)
TrJ
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRY
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-8
EXISTING CONDITION
Max. 80ft Wave
Basin Light Pole
Max. 40ft Hotel F.
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOTEL & WAVE BASIN LIGHTS
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH PERIMETER WALL & LANDSCAPE
Note:
The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. There will be a 6 -foot perimeter wall and perimeter landscaping along the public street. Higher project features (hotel and Tight
poles) are approximately 0.75 miles away from this location, at the base of Coral Mountain. The hotel and light poles are not visible above the community wall in the foreground and are
further screened by landscape and residential homes. The hotel and fight poles would barely be visible even without the perimeter wall. The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.
N.T.S.
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSING
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "C": VIEW FROM ANDALUSIA ENTRY
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-9
Line of Sight
1
2.745' TO VIEWING LOCATION
Prop. Wave Basin
Ex. Mountain Peak
\o— Ex. Mountain Side
N.T.S.
PLAN VIEW
N.T.S
— line of Sight (View Peak)
��—r line of Sight
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION
N.T.S
DETAIL 'A'
WAVE BASIN / LIGHT
N.T.S.
I_ Line of Sight (View Peak) -11
Prop. Perimeter Tree Line of Sight
I— Prop. Right of Way
Prop. 6' Perimeter Wok
Line of Sight
r_
DETAIL
MADISON STREET
(Public Road)
1
See Detail '8'
r li=e of Sight (View
■ Avenue 60
(ublic Roa�
■
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREET
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-10
EXISTING CONDITION
Max. 80k Wave [Max. 40ft Hotel
Basin Light Pole
r -"✓Ss 1
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOTEL & WAVE BASIN LIGHTS
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH PERIMETER WALL & LANDSCAPE
Note:
The project boundary fronts Madison Street at this location. There will be a 6 -foot perimeter wall and perimeter landscaping along the public street. Similar to location C, higher
project features (hotel and light poles) are approximately 0.50 miles away from this location. at the base of Coral Mountain. The poles are barely visible even without the
community wall in the foreground, and would be completely screened by perimeter landscape and residential homes. The mountain panorama and ridgelines remain visible.
N.T.S.
VISUAL SIMULATION WITH HOUSING
MSA CONSULTING, INC.Et
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "D": VIEW FROM MADISON STREET
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-11
aa:
•
'.3
51
Wave Basin
Prop. Wave
Basin Light
Prep. Line of Sight
Prop. View Location J
AVENUE 60
Prop. Hotel
N.T.S.
r=ine-t Sight
PLAN VIEW
N. T.S
See Detail 'A'
Prop. Wave Basin
■ Proi■ Wave Bann light
I
_ ._---_—
Ex. Boundary &Prop. Wall o/ Project
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION
N.T.S
1
E
1,274' TO VIEWING LOCATION
Line of Sight
Prop. Wave Baen light
• • •
DETAIL 'A'
WAVE BASIN / LIGHT
(Public Road)
1
1
Ex. Right of Way of Avenue 60
MO MI
1
Line of Sight
DETAIL 'B'
AVENUE 60
(Public Road)
.J
-�=ne-f Sig -t
See Detail
17
Avenue 60
(Public Road)
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION "E": FROM AVENUE 60
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-12
EXISTING CONDITION
Note:
The project boundary does not front Avenue 60 at this location but lies approximatey 0.20 miles to the northwest. The
nearest light pole is approximately 0.25 miles from the viewpoint location and 8 largely screened by an existing palm
grove on a neighboring property. The ridgefne of Coral Mountain remains Wsible with little appreciable change.
N.T.S.
Max. 8010 Wave
Basin Light Pole
VISUAL SIMULATION
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
VISUAL SIMULATION VIEWPOINT "E": VIEW FROM AVENUE 60
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-13
4.1 AESTHETICS
Additional discussion regarding the proposed structures and buildings in each zone is provided below.
Wave Basin lighting & structure heights
The project site is currently zoned for the development of Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Couse
(GC), and General Commercial (GC). In order to analyze the project's impacts, the development
standards for the current (baseline) condition of RL zones were referenced, but the potential impacts
are evaluated in comparison to the existing undeveloped baseline conditions.
Per the LQMC, the maximum building height permitted in RL zones is 28 feet. The Specific Plan permits
a building height of up to 45 feet (4 stories) in Planning Area III B, the Wave Basin. PA III B also
proposes seventeen (17), 80 -foot -high Tight poles surrounding the Wave Basin to illuminate the
proposed water feature. The Municipal Code, Section 9.100.150, allows light poles up to 8 feet for
landscape lighting, but exempts lighting of public and private recreational facilities, which must be
shielded (downward facing) and are subject to an hour limit of 10:00 p.m. (LQMC 9.100.150(1)(4).
Therefore, the proposed project would result in higher structures and light poles in PA III than would
be currently permitted in an RL zone, but that do not violate any express limits of the Municipal Code
for lighting recreational facilities.
PA III B is proposed to be located in the southwest portion of the project property. PA III B is located
approximately 700 feet north of Avenue 60, 200 feet east of vacant and developed residential estate
lots, 1,500 feet east of Madison Street, and 2,600 feet south of Avenue 58. PA III B is located at
distances over 1,500 feet from public view (i.e. public roadways such as Madison Street and Avenue
58).
As indicated in Exhibit 4.1-6, the 80 -foot light poles lie within the line of sight for motorists and
pedestrians at the Lion's Gate entry along Avenue 58. However, as shown in Exhibit 4.1-7, the light
pole would be located approximately 4,000 feet from the Lion's Gate location and would not be visible
to the naked eye. Additionally, the perimeter landscaping and walls would further obstruct the
proposed lights. The nature of the proposed light poles is similar to those used to illuminate a sports
field (while the lights themselves would be smaller and more narrowly focused on the Wave Basin).
The poles will be spaced approximately 20 feet from each other and would include steel poles with
lights at the top, oriented downward, towards the Wave Basin. Some light poles may be visible to the
residential estate lots and Avenue 60; however, due to the distance of the fixtures to adjacent
properties and the small mass of the proposed light fixtures, they are not anticipated to significantly
impact the scenic vista.
Similar to a palm tree trunk, the vertical light poles will occupy very little mass. The lights at the top
of the poles, would be viewed from a distance that would only impact a small area of the scenic vista,
relative to the overall landscape. Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains, the scenic vistas in
question, would not be obstructed by the narrow light poles or the 45 -foot structure because the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-39 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
mountains stand at approximately 400 feet and 8,000 feet above sea level, respectively, and would
remain visible to motorist traveling on the public roadways.
The proposed building height of 45 feet exceeds the City's permitted height in the RL zone, however,
the additional height will not result in significant impacts to existing views of scenic vistas due to the
distance from these structures from the surrounding roadways and viewsheds. As illustrated in
Exhibit 4.1-7, the base of Coral Mountain would be obstructed by the perimeter walls, landscaping
and proposed residential structures, but the peaks of the Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains
will be visible from most locations.
In summary, the proposed wave basin lighting and building heights proposed within PA III would not
directly impact existing views of scenic vistas, due to their location at the interior of the project, and
their distance from off-site viewsheds. Impacts of change from Low Density Residential to Tourist
Commercial requested as part of the proposed project would not significantly impact scenic vistas.
Parks and Recreation Zone
Permitted structure height within Parks and Recreation Zones in the City is 28 feet (2 stories). The
Specific Plan permits a maximum height of 50 feet for a ropes course/zipline. This would be permitted
in Planning Area IV, located in the southwestern portion of the site, adjacent to Coral Mountain, and
more than 700 feet north, 2,600 feet south, and 1,500 feet west from the adjacent roadways and
residential communities. As stated previously, Coral Mountain stands approximately 400 feet above
mean sea level.
A ropes course is typically designed to include tall wood (or equivalent) posts to connect rope paths.
The visual nature of ropes course and ziplines do not include structures large in mass and obtrusive
to viewsheds. For a visual comparison, a ropes course and zipline are visually similar to a standard
utility power pole. Power poles can stand approximately 40 feet, or higher depending on clearance,
and can include wood posts and power lines in-between each wood post, which are separated by
approximately 100 feet. From a distance, the power lines are typically difficult to see with the naked
eye because they are thin in diameter and are neutral in color. Similar to utility power facilities, ropes
courses and ziplines will consist of posts, ropes or wires for travel in-between posts, and additional
components such as wood steps and rope nets, depending on the design of the ropes course. In
addition, these recreational amenities will be located approximately 1,500 feet from Madison Street
and 2,600 feet from Avenue 58, and screened by the project's perimeter walls and landscaping.
Therefore, the ropes course and zipline would not be visible from these arterial roadways, and would
not obstruct the views of Coral Mountain from surrounding roadways and land uses, as shown in
Exhibits 4.1-4 through 4.1-13. The Santa Rosa Mountains, south of the City, would not be obstructed
by the 50 -foot structure due to the Mountains' height and distance from the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-40 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Impacts to Off -Site Properties
Views from the existing single family residential properties north, east, and south of the project would
be partially obstructed by the proposed structures during project operation. Views of Coral Mountain
and the Santa Rosa Mountains when viewed from the properties to the west of the project, will not
be obstructed by the proposed project. The following discussion analyzes the project's impacts to
scenic vista relative to the southern, eastern, northern, and western properties.
Southern Properties
Properties to the south of the project include estate residential homes, as well as single family
residential dwellings, and vacant lots for future single family residential dwellings both north and
south of Avenue 60. From these properties, Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible
to the west and northwest and provide the prominent views and vistas. The Santa Rosa Mountains
are visible to the south, and the Indio Hills are visible from a distance to the north from some
locations, but are currently obstructed by existing vegetation, including both tall trees and shrubs.
The proposed project would develop walls along the perimeter of the property, partially obstructing
the views of the Indio Hills to the north. Coral Mountain to the west and the Santa Rosa Mountains
to the south would remain largely unobstructed from the properties situated south of Avenue 60,
because the project will not be located in the line of sight between the properties south of Avenue
60 and the mountains. Depending on viewpoint location, the proposed project may obstruct views of
Coral Mountain when viewed by properties south of the project, and north of Avenue 60. These views
are currently obstructed by existing vegetation on developed properties, as shown in Exhibit 4.1-13.
The project -associated infrastructure, distant buildings, and landscaping proposed for the project
perimeter, may partially obstruct views of Coral Mountain to the west from the south -lying properties
adjacent to the project. However, as previously stated, these views are currently obstructed by
existing vegetation. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains when observed from the southern properties
would not be obstructed by the proposed project, because the Santa Rosa Mountains are located
south and southwest of the project and are partially obstructed by Dike No. 4, existing structures,
landscaping, and infrastructure, depending on viewpoint.
The 80 -foot pole lights proposed at Planning Area III B (the Wave Basin) would be visible to the
properties south of the project, specifically the estate residential lots, due to their proximity to PA III
B. PA III B is located approximately 700 feet north of Avenue 60, and 200 feet east of (vacant and
developed) residential estate lots. As described in the subsection titled Wave Basin Lighting, above,
the impacts of the mass and height of the poles will be less than significant on these properties. The
impacts associated with lighting from these fixtures is discussed below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-41 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Eastern properties
Properties east of the project include Andalusia Country Club, separated from the site by Madison
Street. From Andalusia, views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains are partially
obstructed by existing manmade infrastructure, landscaping, perimeter walls, and natural vegetation.
As stated previously, 6 -foot walls and landscaping are proposed along the perimeter of the site.
Proposed structure height is limited to 22 feet within 150 feet of the Madison Street right-of-way in
order to maintain the scenic vistas from motorists along this roadway. The proposed project would
introduce additional buildings, perimeter walls and landscaping, and associated infrastructure that
would partially obstruct views of the foothills of the Santa Rosas in the west- and southwest -lying
scenic vistas, but the upslope areas of the mountains will remain unobstructed, due to distance and
the relatively small mass associated with single family homes within the proposed project.
Proposed buildings within the property would obstruct the views of Coral Mountain and the lowest
portions of the Santa Rosa Mountains from the east -lying properties, depending on viewpoint.
However, the proposed 80 -foot lighting equipment and 50 -foot ropes course would not be visible, as
described above.
Due to the height of the Santa Rosa Mountains and their distance from the Andalusia Country Club
property, impacts from the project to this scenic vista would not be significant.
Northern properties
Properties north of the project include vacant residential lands south of Avenue 58, and gated, single
family residential communities north of Avenue 58. An abandoned, partially graded residential
community (designated for Low Density Residential land use) lies south of Avenue 58 and north of
the project site. This property is characterized by graded roadways, graded and stabilized pads, and
aboveground utilities (i.e., fire hydrants and utility boxes). Chain-link fencing surrounds the perimeter
of this undeveloped property. East of the chain-link fencing, north and west of the project site, and
south of Avenue 58 lies approximately 19.43 acres of vacant and undeveloped land designated for
Medium/High Density Residential. This property is characterized by scattered vegetation, similar to
the project site. North of Avenue 58 are existing gated residential communities, designated as Low
Density Residential.
From the northern properties, views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains, to the south
and southwest, are visible and largely unobstructed. The proposed project would introduce buildings,
perimeter walls, and landscaping that would partially obstruct the existing scenic vistas to the south
and southwest, as shown in Exhibits 4.1-4 through 4.1-7. As previously stated, 6 -foot walls and
landscaping are proposed along the perimeter of the site. Although development of the project will
result in obstructed views of the existing scenic vistas, these obstructions are similar to the other
residential and resort communities developed in the area and the project will minimize impacts to
the scenic vista by reducing the residential building heights within 150 -feet of the Avenue 58 right -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-42 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
of -way. The base of the Santa Rosas will be impacted by the project's structures; however, with the
implementation of the proposed building heights, as well as the increased setbacks (established in
Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2), the peak of Coral Mountain and the majority of the Santa
Rosa Mountains would not be significantly obstructed to the motorists traveling on Avenue 58, and
to the residential communities north of Avenue 58. This is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-7, Visual
Simulation Viewpoint "8": View from Lion's Gate.
Although the proposed buildings will impact the scenic vistas to the south and southwest, the
residential structures proposed south of Avenue 58 will be consistent with the existing residential
context in the surrounding area, which includes low density residential communities, with perimeter
block walls and landscaping. As previously stated in this discussion, the mass and scale of the
proposed residential structures will avoid large building masses and heights that are inconsistent with
the existing surrounding communities. Nevertheless, as described above, the impact of the perimeter
wall, landscaping and residences on views from the north is considered a significant impact. Impacts
will be reduced to the greatest extent feasible through the implementation of Mitigation Measures
AES -1 and AES -2.
From Avenue 58, the proposed Wave Basin and light pole infrastructure would be located between
approximately 2,600 feet to 4,000 feet south of the right-of-way. Some of the light poles may be
visible to the residential lots and Avenue 58; however, the very limited mass of the proposed light
fixtures is not anticipated to significantly impact the scenic vistas because the mid-range and peaks
of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains would not be obstructed by the 80 -foot poles, as
indicated in Exhibits 4.1-5 and 4.1-7.
The 50 -foot structures proposed for the ropes course in the Parks and Recreation Zone would have
no impact on views from the northern properties due to distance and their positioning at the far south
end of the project site.
Western Properties
Properties to the west include vacant land and a private residential community, the Quarry at La
Quinta. From the western properties, views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains, to the
south and southeast, are visible and largely unobstructed. Development of the proposed project
would not obstruct the views of Coral Mountain or the Santa Rosa Mountains from the properties to
the west. The project property would not be observed from the vast majority of the Quarry at La
Quinta due to the location of Dike No. 2, which blocks the view of the project site from the existing
residential community west of the site. The project will have no impact on views of Coral Mountain
and the Santa Rosa Mountains when viewed from the western properties.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-43 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Impacts to (Future) On -Site Properties
Building setbacks from internal roads would be established to limit the amount of building obstruction
from onsite motorists and pedestrians. The building height standards, mass and scale guidelines and
setback requirements established in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will ensure that the
views and scenic vistas that surround the project property would be minimally impacted by onsite
development. Additionally, the design features throughout the project property will complement the
existing natural scenic vistas with architecture and landscape improvements.
Off -Site Improvements
The project is also required to make offsite improvements for electrical power to the site. These
improvements would take place within IID's existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-
of-way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA West. All infrastructure outside the substation will
be underground, and will have no impact on scenic vistas. The addition of the transformer will be
consistent with the existing equipment in the substation, and will have no impact on scenic vistas.
Conclusion
As determined in the line of sight analyses and visual simulations, the project site will result in the
partial obstruction of views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains, depending on location
and viewpoint. Currently, these views are largely unobstructed, due to the undeveloped and vacant
nature of the project site. Therefore, development of the project property would result in obstructed
and partially obstructed views of these scenic resources. The project proposes perimeter landscaping
and walls at the frontages of the public -rights-of-way. The project property and frontages will be
designed to complement the natural and existing environment. As shown in Exhibits 4.1-4 through
4.1-13, views of Coral Mountain are unaffected at the Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 viewpoint locations;
partially obstructed at the Lion's Gate entry; and fully obstructed at the Andalusia entry and Madison
Street locations. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains are largely unobstructed by the proposed
project, except for the Lion's Gate location, which are partially obstructed by proposed perimeter
landscaping and residential homes. However, due to the size and distance of the Santa Rosa
Mountains in relation to Coral Mountain, the midrange and peaks of the Santa Rosa Mountains
remain visible.
Views observed along public rights -of -ways at certain locations will be impacted with the
development of the project site. However, when traveling along Avenue 58 and Madison Street the
views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains change depending on the landscaping at the
various locations, as well as the buildings located near the project frontage. At various public
viewshed locations, Coral Mountain may be visible to the passing motorist or pedestrian, while at
other locations the views of Coral Mountain may be obstructed briefly by a tree with a large canopy,
the perimeter walls, and roofs of residential units. Development of the proposed project will not
completely remove the views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains from public view.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-44 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
While the project's impacts on views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains would be
essentially the same as the impacts of any development of the project site, the project's perimeter
walls, landscaping, and structures will partially obstruct views of these scenic resources, which is
considered a significant impact. To reduce project impacts to scenic vistas to the greatest extent
feasible the project will implement Mitigation Measure AES -1, which requires the perimeter walls to
be setback from the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30
feet (10 feet more than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review
and approval of final perimeter wall and landscape plans, and Mitigation Measure AES -2, which
requires a minimum setback of 75 feet between any residential structure and the Madison Street and
Avenue 58 public rights-of-way. However, impacts associated with scenic vistas cannot be reduced
to less than significant levels, and will remain significant and unavoidable.
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway corridor?
There are no State or locally designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed project.
The Circulation Element of the La Quinta 2035 General Plan (LQGP) identifies designated image
corridors, as well as street design standards for the City, which contribute to the scenic character and
diverse identity of La Quinta.
City Image Corridors provide views of the Santa Rosa Mountains and other mountains surrounding
the Coachella Valley. Policy CIR-1.17 in the City General Plan, states that in order to preserve the
aesthetic values on the City's streets, optimum landscape setbacks shall be maintained along all
designated General Plan Image Corridors. Exhibit 11-4, Image Corridors in the General Plan, identifies
the segment of Madison Street that lies east of the project property as an Image Corridor.
Additionally, Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 are also Image Corridors. In compliance with the Image
Corridor standards implemented by the City, the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan requires
perimeter walls and landscaping consistent with City standards, and a 22 -foot height limitation on
residential structures within a setback distance of 150 feet from the right-of-way consistent with La
Quinta Municipal Zoning Code Section 9.50.020. Therefore, impacts associated with image corridors
would be less than significant.
Coral Mountain
Coral Mountain partially lies within the southwest corner of the project property. Coral Mountain
extends over 400 feet above sea level and provides a scenic resource for the surrounding area. The
Mountain is currently viewed without significant obstructions from the public roadways, Avenue 58
to the north, and Madison Street to the east. The project proposes no construction on or immediately
adjacent to Coral Mountain. As a result of the cultural resources identified on and surrounding that
portion of Coral Mountain that occurs on the project site, as more fully described in the Cultural
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-45 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Sections, a restricted Environmentally Sensitive Area will be
recorded on the area to protect these resources, and will concurrently protect the Mountain.
Residential structures within the project will be a minimum of 150 feet from the toe of slope, and will
consist of low density residential units in PA II. Structures associated with the Wave Basin will be
located approximately 200 feet east of Coral Mountain's toe of slope. Recreational
equipment/amenities such as a ropes course, bike trail, or zipline are prohibited within
Environmentally Sensitive Areas and must therefore be located on level terrain in PA IV such that the
mountain face and toe of slope are preserved. None of these structures will result in damage to the
Mountain. Therefore, because no alteration or modification is proposed to Coral Mountain, there will
be no damage to this scenic resource, and no impact would occur.
Adobe
According to the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey
Report (referred to as "Cultural Report" herein), conducted by CRM Tech (Appendix E), a partially
collapsed adobe house is located near the center of the project area, along with concrete pads and
footings associated with the residential and agricultural buildings of the ranch that occurred on the
project site. During CRM Tech's field investigation, they discovered that the adobe building was
vandalized, burned, and deteriorated. However, the walls are standing, and the adobe bricks are in
overall good condition. The residence foundation, which may be the remains of one of the earlier
structures at the site, dating from 1920s or before, and may also include the original trash pits or
privies which could contain valuable artifacts revealing much about life in the harsh environment at
such an early date. The site remains eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources
and has a local level of significance. Per the findings of the Cultural Report, and as discussed in detail
in the Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, the site meets the definition of a historical resource and
impacts to it would be significant. Therefore, Mitigation Measure CUL -1 was established for this site.
Mitigation Measure CUL -1 requires that a comprehensive recordation program be prepared by a
qualified archaeologist for the site, requiring an appropriate buffer around the adobe remains and
preservation in perpetuity of the adobe by the project's homeowners' association. This mitigation
measure will assure that this significant historic resource is protected, and as a result, there will be
no impact relating to damage of a historic scenic resource. In addition, due to the vandalized and
deteriorated condition of the structure, and the fact that it is not readily visible to drivers and
pedestrians on the perimeter roadways, this structure is not considered a significant scenic resource,
even though it maintains historical significance.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-46 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Visual Character
The project site is located on the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The land uses
that currently surround the project property consist primarily of private and gated, low-density
residential communities. Andalusia Country Club lies east of the project property and is separated by
the paved roadway, Madison Street. Additional private, gated low-density residential communities
lie north of the project property, north of Avenue 58. These gated communities vary from
approximately 7 acres to 20 acres in size and include low-density tract homes. The street frontage of
the communities to the north and east are delineated with block walls, landscaping, and meandering
sidewalks. The area south of Avenue 58, adjacent to the project's northern boundary, is characterized
by vacant land. Dispersed estate residential dwellings lie south of the project site, and vacant land lies
south and west of the project property. These uses contribute to the suburban context of the project
and surrounding area.
Low Density Residential Zone
The maximum building height for Low Density Residential Zones is 28 feet (2 stories). The Specific
Plan permits a maximum building height of 32 feet (2 stories), but only allows a maximum height of
22 feet within 150 feet of the Madison Street and Avenue 58 rights-of-way in the Low Density
Residential Zone. The proposed maximum height of 32 feet for structures in the Low Density
Residential land use designations located outside the required setback areas would exceed the
permitted building height standard established by the City of La Quinta by four (4) feet.
The Low Density Residential area proposed for the project will be located immediately adjacent to
Avenue 58 and vacant lots to the north, Madison Street to the east, residential to the south, and
vacant land and Coral Mountain to the west.
The vacant properties, located immediately adjacent to the property's northwestern boundary (south
of Avenue 58), are currently undeveloped. Per the La Quinta General Plan, the existing land use
designations for the properties include low density residential (for the western property) and
medium/high density residential (for the eastern property). Based on the existing land use
designations for the properties, development will include residential communities, similar to those
existing in the surrounding area. They will be required to comply with City standards and design
guidelines established for Low and Medium/High Density zones.
A mix of undeveloped lots and estate residential lots are located south of the project site. These
properties include large lots with structures set back from the property's boundaries. South of the
project, south of Avenue 60, is a residential community similar to those located north of Avenue 58.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-47 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
As previously stated, the project proposes low density residential uses adjacent to existing public
rights-of-way, vacant lots and residential communities. The existing context of the project vicinity
includes residential communities and undeveloped land. Typical of residential communities in La
Quinta, and in the Coachella Valley, residential lots within communities may be oriented in a manner
where the backyard of residential dwelling lies adjacent to a public right-of-way. This increases the
building's setback from the road, both reducing the noise impact generated from traffic, and the
building's impact on the surrounding visual character; compared to if the dwelling unit's frontage was
oriented facing the roadway. Similar to the existing residential context of La Quinta, it is anticipated
that residential lots within the project's Low Density Residential zone, will abut the project's
boundaries, including the Avenue 58 (north) and Madison Street (east) frontages. Additionally, the
residential buildings located with 150 feet of the Madison Street and Avenue 58 right-of-way will be
limited to a height of 22 feet, as required by the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan and the La Quinta
Municipal Code (Section 9.50.020).
The project's proposed low density residential uses are consistent with the existing residential context
in the surrounding area. Residential communities are located north, and east of the proposed project
consist of residential dwellings, with some homes located adjacent to the rights-of-way.
In addition, the proposed development will be visually consistent with the other residential and resort
communities located in this portion of the City of La Quinta, thus maintaining the visual character of
the area as well as views of the Santa Rosa Mountains.
The mass and scale of the residential structures proposed in the low density residential use will be
consistent with the existing residential context in the surrounding area. Large building masses and
heights are not proposed for the project's low density residential structures. The project's residential
structures located within 150 feet of the Madison Street and Avenue 58 rights-of-way are required to
be a maximum of 22 feet, in order to reduce project -generated obstructions from these buildings to
minimize impacts, due to the distance of the buildings from the existing land uses and rights-of-way.
Low Density Residential - PA 11
PA II is proposed to create residential neighborhoods that maximize privacy between individual
homes, reflect contemporary desert architecture and embrace the natural desert landscape. This
232.3 -acre portion of the site will construct 496 residential dwellings. PA II is proposed to abut a
majority of the Avenue 58 and Madison Street rights-of-way. Therefore, this Planning Area would
contribute to the visual character viewed by motorists and pedestrians traveling along these public
roadways. The project's frontage along these public roadways will consist of perimeter landscaping
and sidewalks, as well as a perimeter block wall. These features are similar to and consistent with the
existing residential communities north and east of the project property. Additionally, perimeter block
walls and landscaping are typical for residential communities within the City of La Quinta.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-48 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
The table below displays the development standards proposed for PA II and the Municipal Code
standards for Low Density Residential zones in order to analyze the potential impacts to scenic quality
of the area.
Table 4.1-6 PA II Development Standards Comparison
Low Density Residential
Detached
Product
Attached
Product
Accessory
Building
Municipal
Code
Min. Lot Size
3,600 sf
3,600 sf
--8
7,200 sf
Max. Structure Height
32 ft 2'3
32 ft 2'3
28 ft 2'3
28 ft
Max. No. Of Stories
2
2
2
2
Min. Area Per Unit
1,400 sf
1,000 sf
250 sf
1,400 sf
Min. Front Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Garage —10 ft
Other Structures -3 ft.
20 ft
Min. Rear Setback
5 ft
5 ft
2 ft
20 ft
Min. Front/Side Facing Attached
Garage (Carport) Setback
15 ft / 3 ft s
15 ft / 3 ft s
--
25 ft
Min. Interior/Corner Side Yard
Setback'
5ft/ 5 ft
5ft6/5ft
5ft6/5 ft
5ft/10ft
Min. Building To Building
Setback 6
0 ft
0 ft
0 ft
--
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
6 ft
6 ft
6 ft
Max. Parking Required
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
--
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
spaces
Notes:
1. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
2. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
3. Excluding chimneys, porticos other incidental architectural features etc. may exceed max. structure height by up
to 5 feet.
4. AC units, trellis elements, pools, and spas are allowed to encroach into side and rear setback areas within 3' of
property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Subject to applicable building code requirements
7. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared to the development
standards in RL Zones as established in Section 9.50 (Table 9-2 in Section 9.50.030) of the La Quinta Municipal
Code.
8. -- = Not Applicable
Consistency Analysis
Height
As demonstrated in Table 4.1-6, PA II proposes building heights of up to 32 feet (2 stories). Building
heights will exceed the existing zoning code by four feet. However, the residential buildings adjacent
to image corridors along public streets shall be limited to 22 feet in height, to reduce the impact on
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-49 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
the natural scenic quality viewed from the public rights-of-way and maintain the low density suburban
visual character of the area. Buildings beyond 150 feet could be 4 feet higher, but due to distance,
this height increase would be imperceptible from the public rights of way or the surrounding existing
and future development on Avenue 58, Madison Street or Avenue 60. See Exhibits 4-1-4 through 4-
1-13.
Lot Size
The project proposes minimum 3,600 -square -foot lot sizes for the attached and detached residential
units. Compared to the Municipal Code, the project proposes half the allowed minimum lot size.
However, the proposed minimum area per unit is 1,400 square feet for detached products and 1,000
square feet for attached products. The project proposes similar area per units to the Municipal Code,
however, it reduces the lot size allowed. The perception from surrounding rights of way and
properties could be of more intense development than the project's surroundings, but the limited
height and landscaping along the perimeter of the project will reduced the perceived impact. The
rooflines visible over the perimeter wall will be of similar character as those in the area, and will not
substantially change the visual character of the area.
Setback
The project proposes reduced setbacks compared to the Municipal Code. Mitigation Measure AES -1
requires a minimum average 30 -foot setback between the perimeter walls and the adjacent public
rights-of-way, consisting of landscaping and sidewalks along the property's Avenue 58 and Madison
Street frontages (which is 10 feet greater than required for designated visual corridors under the
Municipal Code). The rear setback proposed for PA II is 5 feet, however, the low density residential
units within 150 feet of Avenue 58 and Madison Street will be required to have a minimum setback
of 75 feet from the adjacent public rights-of-way. This is indicated as Mitigation Measure AES -2 and
will reduce impacts to scenic vistas (see discussion a). The residential land use proposed for PA II, in
conjunction with the additional 50 -foot setback in areas within 150 feet from Avenue 58 and Madison
Street, is consistent with the character of the existing residential communities north of Avenue 58
and east of Madison Street.
Conclusion
As demonstrated in Table 4.1-6, the lot size, and setbacks proposed for the project are not fully
compliant with the City's established Municipal Code development standards for Low Density
Residential zones. Product types proposed in the RL zone may include estate compounds, single-
family detached/attached units, alley loaded homes, and clustered products, so long as the overall
number of allowable units within the PA is not exceeded.
The proposed building heights within the RL zone, and beyond 150 feet from the Avenue 58 and
Madison Street rights-of-way, exceed the maximum building height established in the Municipal
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-50 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Code; however, the increase of 4 feet would not significantly impact the scenic quality and visual
character of the area, because due to distance, the height increase would be imperceptible from the
public rights-of-way or the surrounding existing and future development on Avenue 58, Madison
Street, or Avenue 60. Additionally, the surrounding visual context is defined by residential
communities with perimeter walls and landscaping. The project will be consistent in design and
massing, similar to the existing residential communities in the area. However, the minimum lot size
proposed for PA II is reduced compared to the surrounding residential communities to allow greater
flexibility for clustering of units and preservation of additional open space and recreational areas. As
previously stated, the perception from surrounding rights of way and properties could be of more
intense development than the project's surroundings, but the limited height of residential units and
landscaping setbacks along the perimeter of the project will reduce the perceived impact.
Additionally, the 75 -foot setback between the residential structures and the adjacent public rights-
of-way along Avenue 58 and Madison Street will also reduce the perceived impact of the residential
buildings. The rooflines visible over the perimeter wall will be of similar character as those in the area,
and will not substantially change the visual character of the area.
Development of PA II would be consistent with the existing residential context in the surrounding
area. The project would not introduce large building masses or inappropriately scaled buildings to the
project site. Therefore, PA II would not result in significant impacts to visual character or scenic
quality.
Neighborhood Commercial - PA 1
PA I is currently designated for Neighborhood Commercial use in both the Zoning Ordinance and
Specific Plan 03-067. Buildings within PA I (approximately 60,000 square feet total) will be one and
two -stories with an eclectic variety of roof -forms and secondary mass elements such as porches,
trellises, and brise-soleil. PA I will occupy 7.7 acres on the northeast corner of the site.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-51 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4.1-7 PA I Development Standards Comparison
Neighborhood Commercial
Project Max/Min
Municpal Codes
Max. Structure Height
35 ft1,2
35
Max. No. of Stories
2
2
Min. Front Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Min. Rear Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Min. Parking
1/250 ft GFA.
1/250 ft GFA
Max. Building Floor Area in PA I
60,000 SF
25 %6
Min. Building Setback to Avenue 58
25 ft
30 ft
Min. Building Setback to Madison Street
25 ft
30 ft
Min. Setback from Interior Property Line3
0 ft
0 ft
Min. Building/Landscape Setback from Residential PA'
40 ft/20 ft
40 ft/20 ft
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
6 ft
Max. Light Pole Height
25 ft
8 ft
Min. Parking Provided
Per Code
1 space per 300 sq
Min. Parking Dimension
9' X 19'
Min. Bicycle Parking
Per Code
Five Bike Parking'
Min. Golf Cart / NEV Parking
Per Code
2
Min. Electric Vehicle Charging Spaces
Per Code
2
Notes:
1. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
2. Architectural and roof projections, such as chimneys, spires, finials and similar features not providing habitable or
otherwise unusable space shall be permitted to extend up to fifteen feet above the maximum structure height.
3. Mechanical equipment to have a minimum 3- foot setback from interior property lines.
4. Landscape setback occurs within the building setback.
5. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA I, compared to the development
standards in CN Zones as established in Section 9.90.040 (Table 9-6) of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
6. 25 % of Planning Area I is 1.9 acres (7.7 acres x 25%). The property proposes a building floor area of 60,000 square
feet, which is approximately 1.4 acres of the site.
7. Five bicycle parking spaces for each tenant having over twenty thousand square feet of gross floor area.
Consistency Analysis
Height
As demonstrated in Table 4.1-7, the project's Neighborhood Commercial zone proposes building
heights of up to 35 feet (2 stories). This is consistent with the Municipal Code for Neighborhood
Commercial zones. Additionally, buildings within 150 feet from the Madison Street and Avenue 58
right-of-way would not exceed 22 feet in height (consistent with Municipal Code 9.50.020). The
building heights proposed for the Neighborhood Commercial project is compliant with City standards.
Building Floor Area
The project proposes 60,000 square feet of commercial uses on approximately 7.7 acres. Per the
Municipal Code, building floor areas are allowed to occupy a maximum of 25 percent of the area. The
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-52 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
project will not exceed the 25 percent maximum building floor area (25 percent of 7.7 acres is 83,853
square feet), therefore, the Neighborhood Commercial project is compliant with City standards
regarding building floor area.
Setback
The project proposes a minimum setback of 25 feet to Madison Street and Avenue 58, whereas the
Municipal Code requires a 30 -foot setback. However, with the building floor area being smaller than
the allowed building floor area in Neighborhood Commercial zones, and the project's compliance with
building height standards, including those within 150 feet of Image Corridors, the setback reduction
of 5 feet would not result in significant impacts because the combination of the limited building
height, reduced building floor area, and landscaping along the perimeter of PA I will reduce the
perceived impact by allowing more visual relief between buildings, avoiding large masses of buildings.
Conclusion
Due to PA I's compliance with the Municipal Code, development of Planning Area I would not result
in significant impacts to visual character or scenic quality.
Tourist Commercial - PA 111
PA III contains a variety of amenities including: The Wave, retail shops, a boutique hotel, and dining
venues on approximately 120.8 acres of the site. Within PA III, six (6) subareas are proposed,
identified as PA III -A through PA III -G. The subareas include: The Wave Basin, Wave Club, Resort
Residential West and East, the Farm, and Back of House, respectively. See the project description for
the definition of each subarea.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-53 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4.1-8 PA III Development Standards Comparison
Tourist Commercial
III -A
III -B
III -C
III -D
III -E
III -F
III -G
Municipal
Code 9
Min. Lot Size (sf)
20,000
20,000
20,000
3,600
3,600
20,000
20,000
7,200
Max. Lot Coverage
50%
10%
70%
70%
70%
50%
70%
50%
Min. Lot Frontage (ft)
25'
25'
25'
30'
30'
25'
25'
--
Min. Livable Areal (sf)
--
--
--
1,400
1,400
--
--
1,400
Min. Accessory
Building Area 2(sf)
--
--
--
300
300
Min. Front Setback
10'
0'
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
20'
Min. Setback from
Walk Streets Or
Sidewalks 3
5'
0'
5'
5'
5'
5'
--
--
Min. Setback from
Wave Basin parcel (ft)
0'
--
0'
0'
0'
--
0'
--
Min. Front Facing
Garage/Carport
Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
25'
Min. Side Facing
Garage/Carport
Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
--
Min. Rear Setback4
--
--
--
5'
5'
--
25'
20'
Min. Interior/Corner
Side Setback 4,5,6
--
--
--
3'/3'
3'/3'
--
--
--
Min. Setback from
Low -Density
Residential District (ft)
--
50'
15'
--
--
--
50'
--
Max. Height 789
(stories/ft)
40/4
45/4
40/3
30/3
30/3
40/3
30/2
28/2
Min. Bldg. Separation9
6'
0'
15'
6'
6'
6'
0'
--
Max Pole Light Height
25'
80'
25'
--
--
40'
40'
8'
Max. Wall Height
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
Min. Parking Provided
1.1 per
key
25
employee
spaces
1 per
500 sf
1 per
bedroom
1 per
bedroom
1 per
500 sf
1 per
1,000 sf
2 spaces
per unit
Min. Parking
Dimension
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
Notes:
1. Excluding garages, casitas or carriage units
2. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
3. Where walk street occurs at rear or side property line, walk street setback shall govern.
4. AC units and other mechanical equipment may encroach within setback up to 3' from property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Excluding chimneys, porticos and other incidental architectural features.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.1-54
June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
7. Including rooftop deck and terraces (e.g. railings, parapets, furniture, shade structures, umbrellas, stairs, access lifts,
elevator housings, etc.).
8. Subject to applicable building code requirements.
9. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared to the development
standards in RL Zones as established in Section 9.50 (Table 9-2 in Section 9.50.030) of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
Additional Notes: III -A = Resort; III -B = The Wave; III -C = Wave Club; III -D = Resort Residential West; III -E = Resort
Residential East; III -F = The Farm; III -G = Back of House. -- = Not Applicable
Consistency Analysis
Height
As demonstrated in Table 4.1-8, the project's Tourist Commercial (CT) zone proposes building heights
of up to 45 feet (4 stories). Due to the project site's current zoning designation of Low Density
Residential, RL development standards were considered in the analysis but impacts on visual
character are evaluated against the existing baseline condition (undeveloped land). Building heights
allowed in the CT zone will exceed the existing zoning code by 17 feet (2 stories). The sub -planning
area that allows this building height is PA III -B, The Wave. Building heights of up to 45 feet would be
located at a minimum of 200 feet from the south -lying properties. Moreover, this Planning Area is
separated from Avenue 58 by 2,600 feet, Madison Street by 1,500 feet and Low Density Residential
land uses, and will not be readily visible from the perimeter roadways due to the perimeter walls,
landscaping, and low density residential units, which are consistent with the surrounding
communities, as shown in Exhibits 4.1-4 through 4.1-13. Therefore, the 45 -foot structures will not
significantly impact the scenic quality viewed from Avenue 58, Madison Street, and the surrounding
properties would not be significantly impacted by the development of 45 -foot buildings within this
Planning Area. In addition to PA III -B, PA III -A, III -C, and III -F propose building heights of up to 40 feet.
However, these sub -planning areas are located between 1,200 feet to 3,300 feet from the
surrounding rights of way. The table below indicates the approximate distances of PA III -A, III -C, and
III -F to Avenue 58, Madison Street, and Avenue 60.
Table 4.1-9 Sub -Planning Area Distances from Rights -of -Way
*Distances were measures from sub -planning area property line (per the TTM)
for a conservative distance, since it is unlikely that the structures with the
maximum height will be located at the sub -planning area property line.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-55 June 2021
Sub -Planning Area
Right -of -Way
III -A
III -C
III -F
Avenue 58
3,000 ft.
2,300 ft.
2,500 ft.
Madison Street
2,100 ft.
3,300 ft.
1,200 ft.
Avenue 60
1,400 ft.
2,700 ft.
2,200 ft.
*Distances were measures from sub -planning area property line (per the TTM)
for a conservative distance, since it is unlikely that the structures with the
maximum height will be located at the sub -planning area property line.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-55 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
As indicated in the table above, the sub -planning areas within PA III are located at extended distances
from the surrounding rights -of -ways such that the proposed buildings within PA III will not be visible
to motorists or pedestrians traveling on the public roadways. PA III is situated in the western and
southwestern portion of the project site, will not be visible to the surrounding properties and public
rights-of-way. Therefore, the visual character would not be impacted.
Planning Area III -G occupies approximately 26.5 acres of land in the southern portion of the project
site. PA III -G is proposed for Back of House operations, which would include unprogrammed gathering
and staging space for temporary equipment and permanent support facilities. PA III -G is the closest
sub -planning area (within PA III) to surrounding development. Currently, the visual character in PA III -
G is defined as vacant, desert land, similar to the entire project site. The temporary and permanent
structures proposed during operation of PA III -G will affect the scenic quality depending on the event
and temporary facilities provided. The proposed temporary facilities would include portable toilets,
shade structures, tenting, and catering equipment during events. These uses would temporarily
impact the scenic quality if visible from Avenue 60. However, these facilities will not remain
permanently onsite. The Back of House sub -planning area will also house up to 12,000 square feet of
necessary permanent support facilities for maintenance, service and administrative operation of the
Wave Basin and resort, including employee parking. These permanent structures proposed in PA III -
G would occupy only approximately 12,000 square feet of the 26.5 -acre sub -planning area. The
permanent facilities would occupy approximately 1 percent of PA III -G, which is a small portion of the
site. The remainder of the site would be open space. Since the permanent facilities would occupy a
small portion of the site, and the additional facilities would be temporary in nature, the proposed
improvements to PA III -G is not considered to significantly impact the scenic quality and visual
character of the site when viewed from surrounding properties and Avenue 60. PA III -G would
implement appropriate setbacks of the facilities in order to avoid impacts to surrounding properties.
Therefore, PA III -G would not significantly impact the visual character and scenic quality of the area.
Pole Height
PA III proposes 80 -foot high light fixtures. The 80 -foot light fixtures proposed for the project would
be located around the Wave Basin (in PA III -B), to illuminate the recreational facility during the
evenings. The project proposes seventeen (17) 80 -foot lights, separated approximately 20 feet from
each other. The proposed 80 -foot -high light poles' mass will not significantly block the scenic vistas
of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains, due to their location in the property and their small
structural mass. See discussion a.) for further analysis. As determined in discussion a.) the light poles
will not be visible from public rights-of-way due to their distances from the public roads. Therefore,
they will not affect the visual character during daylight hours. In order to assure that lighting does not
result in significant nighttime impacts, and consistent with LQMC, Mitigation Measure AES -3 requires
that lights operate only from dusk to 10 PM.. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-56 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
measures, the light and light poles will have less than significant impacts on visual character and
scenic quality.
Lot Coverage
The project proposes increased lot coverage for PA III -C, III -D, III -E, and III -F, compared to the
Municipal Code. However, impacts to visual character will be less than significant due to the Planning
Area's distance from surrounding uses, internal isolation from the lower density residential uses, and
separation by open space to the south, as well as the perimeter walls, landscaping and enhanced
setbacks as described above. As previously determined, sub -planning areas III -C and III -F are located
between 1,200 feet and 3,300 feet from the surrounding public roads and will not impact the visual
character due to their distances from the surrounding roadways. Sub -PAs III -D and III -E are also
located at great distances from public roads, and therefore, the operation of PA III will not result in
impacts to visual character since they will not be viewed from the surrounding public rights-of-way.
The distances are indicated in the table below.
Table 4.1-10 Sub -Planning Area Distances from Rights -of -Way
*Distances were measures from sub -planning area property line (per the TTM)
for a conservative distance.
The southern -most sub -planning area within PA III includes PA III -G, the Back of House. As previously
stated, PA III -G will be utilized primarily as open space, with 12,000 square feet of permanent
structures, as well as temporary facilities during events. PA III -G acts as an open space area providing
additional separation between the proposed uses, and the existing uses south of the project.
Therefore, the increased lot coverage in portions of Planning Area III will result in less than significant
impacts.
Conclusion
As shown in Table 4.1-8, the building heights, pole heights, and lot coverage proposed for PA III are
not fully consistent with the City's established Municipal Code development standards. However, as
described above, the building and lighting height standards allowed under the proposed Specific Plan
are located at the center of the site, and will neither be visible from outside the project, nor impact
the viewsheds surrounding the project. The visual character of the project will be represented by a
perimeter landscaped parkway and wall, and single family homes inside that wall. The development
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-57 June 2021
Sub -Planning Area
Right -of -Way
III -D
III -E
Avenue 58
2,100 ft.
3,300 ft.
Madison Street
2,100 ft.
1,300 ft.
Avenue 60
2,000 ft.
840 ft.
*Distances were measures from sub -planning area property line (per the TTM)
for a conservative distance.
The southern -most sub -planning area within PA III includes PA III -G, the Back of House. As previously
stated, PA III -G will be utilized primarily as open space, with 12,000 square feet of permanent
structures, as well as temporary facilities during events. PA III -G acts as an open space area providing
additional separation between the proposed uses, and the existing uses south of the project.
Therefore, the increased lot coverage in portions of Planning Area III will result in less than significant
impacts.
Conclusion
As shown in Table 4.1-8, the building heights, pole heights, and lot coverage proposed for PA III are
not fully consistent with the City's established Municipal Code development standards. However, as
described above, the building and lighting height standards allowed under the proposed Specific Plan
are located at the center of the site, and will neither be visible from outside the project, nor impact
the viewsheds surrounding the project. The visual character of the project will be represented by a
perimeter landscaped parkway and wall, and single family homes inside that wall. The development
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-57 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
features in PA III do no abut public streets, will be out of public view, and will have less than significant
impacts on the visual character of the area.
Parks and Recreation - PA IV
PA IV is intended to accommodate low -impact active and passive recreation activities, such as hiking
and biking trails, and ropes course and zipline on approximately 23.6 acres. PA IV occurs on the
southwestern corner of the site, and includes Coral Mountain.
Table 4.1-11 PA IV Development Standards Comparison
Parks and Recreation
Max./Min.
Municipal Code'
Min. Building Site
--
--2
Min. Lot Frontage
--
--
Max. Structure Height
12 ft
28 ft
Max. Height - Ropes Course/Zipline
50 ft
--
Max. Height — Other Recreational Equipment
20 ft
--
Max. Building Coverage in PA IV
5,000 sf
--
Max. Number of Stories
1
2
Min. Setback from Property Line
10 ft
0 ft
Notes:
1. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared
to the development standards in PR Zones as established in Section 9.130 (Table 9-9 in
Section 9.130.010) of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. -- = Not Applicable
Consistency Analysis
Height
As demonstrated in Table 4.1-11, PA IV proposes structure heights of up to 50 feet associated with
the ropes course. Additional structures associated with PA IV would be a maximum of 12 feet, and
one story. Structure heights allowed in the PR zone, as defined in the Municipal Code, are 28 feet (2
stories). Furthermore, structures are limited to a total of 5,000 square feet within this 23.6 acre
planning area, meaning that building mass will be imperceptible in this planning area. Although the
Specific Plan allows for heights of 50 feet in this PA, that limit is allowed only for the ropes course,
and will consist of climbing features and other components of the ropes course that are small in scale.
Therefore, although development standards allowed for PA IV will exceed or change zoning standards
in the PR zone, these changes will not substantially alter the visual character of PA IV and the
surrounding areas, and impacts are expected to be less than significant.
Conclusion
According to the LQMC, permitted uses within PR zones include public parks, lakes, passive
recreational facilities, clubhouses and community pools, and public tennis clubs. PA IV would be an
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-58 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
open space area with maximum building heights of 12 feet (1 story) for up to 5,000 square feet of
building area, as compared to the allowed building heights of 28 feet (2 stories). PA IV would develop
a 50 -foot zipline and ropes course, which will result in small, non -intrusive course elements in the PA.
The limitations in developed area in PA IV will result in less than significant impacts to the scenic
quality and visual character of the area. Impacts to scenic quality and visual character would be less
than significant.
Design Features
The project proposes a mixed-use project that recognizes and responds to the natural and aesthetic
character of the property, with multiple resort and recreational amenities.
All proposed development within the project area is required to be cohesive and complementary to
the adjacent land uses by incorporating improvements such as landscaping and block walls along the
perimeter of the project. In order to ensure visual consistency throughout the project area, the
project will include shared design guidelines for building materials, roof products, building massing
and scale, and walls and fences throughout the project. For example, the Planning Areas are proposed
to include high-performance materials with sustainable attributes; natural stone, stucco,
architectural concrete, pre -finished metal panels, cementitious panels or siding, and thermally -
modified wood siding may be utilized as the finish material for vertical surfaces in a range of natural
colors which complement the desert landscape. Shared design guidelines within Planning Areas I, II,
III and IV are established in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan to maintain visual consistency
and scenic quality throughout the project property.
As discussed in detail above, the proposed project is consistent with the visual character and scenic
quality of the area, which is characterized by residential developments, golf courses, open space, and
commercial land uses. The project's perimeter landscaping, block wall, and the entry points will be
similar in appearance and quality to the existing communities to the north, east, and south. The
residential and resort uses within the project will be subject to the regulations outlined within the
Specific Plan. It will be consistent with the prevailing desert -themed architectural styles of other
resort and residential developments in the City, including the gated residential communities to the
north, Andalusia Country Club to the east, and gated residential communities to the south. Impacts
associated with visual character and scenic quality will be less than significant.
Off -Site Improvements
The project is also required to make offsite site improvements for electrical power to the site. These
improvements would take place within IID's existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-
of-way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA West. Construction of the transformer at the
substation would be entirely consistent with other substation components, and would occur behind
the walls of the existing substation. The conduit and line extensions will occur entirely below Avenue
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-59 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
58 and will not be visible. Overall, the required off-site improvements will have no impact on visual
character or scenic quality.
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
The development site for the proposed project occurs on approximately 386 acres of vacant land with
scattered vegetation throughout. The project site does not currently have existing sources of lighting.
Presently, existing sources of fixed nighttime lighting in the project vicinity can be attributed to the
existing residential areas located north, east and south of the site. The gated residential communities
north and east of the project contribute to low -intensity lighting, which includes wall -mounted,
downward -oriented fixtures in the patio, side, and front yards of the homes. The gated entries for
these residential communities are also dimly lit, as well as the exterior sidewalks, which include small
spotlighting on landscaping and along the paved pathways. The residential community east of the
project site, Andalusia Country Club, includes lighting for the entry guard house and landscaped street
frontages. Residential properties and associated structures are located south of the project. These
residential dwellings include low -intensity lighting, similar to those previously described. A residential
community has been partially developed and abandoned south of the proposed project and south of
Avenue 60. This community will have light fixtures similar to the residential properties north of the
project site. Coral Mountain and open space areas lie west of the project site. These areas do not
currently emit light. Additionally, the vacant properties surrounding the project property (to the
north, south, and west) do not contribute to the area's existing ambient lighting. Street lighting (i.e.
light posts) do not occur on the adjacent roadways to the project site. The closest signalized traffic
intersection is located approximately one -mile north of the subject site, at the Madison Street and
Airport Boulevard intersection.
Proposed project access would be located from two entry points at Avenue 58 (north), two entry
points on Madison Street (east), and one entry point on Avenue 60 (south). The northern entries and
one of the western entries will provide access to the Neighborhood Commercial in PA I. The second
entry point on Madison Street will provide the primary access to the balance of the site. The Avenue
60 entry will provide additional access to the site. The proposed entries and landscape improvements
to the Avenue 58 and Madison Street frontages will incorporate a uniform landscape and lighting plan
outside of the perimeter walls that conforms to standards for City designated image corridors. The
light fixtures will accentuate the proposed signage, trees, and other landscaping features, making
them compatible with the landscaped center medians along Madison Street and the developed gated
communities surrounding the project site. For purposes of nighttime safety, the proposed parking
lots, gated entry points, common areas, courtyards, and pedestrian paths are also expected to include
the appropriate levels of illumination consistent with the City's Municipal Code. Outdoor lighting in
PA I, II and IV would comply with the standards in La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) Section
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-60 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
9.100.150, which requires all exterior lighting to be fully or partially shielded. Fully shielded means
the fixture shall be shielded in such a manner that light rays emitted by the fixture, either directly
from the lamp or indirectly from the fixture, are projected below a horizontal plane running through
the lowest point on the fixture where light is emitted, thus preventing the emission of light above the
horizontal. Partially shielded is when the fixture is shielded in such a manner that the bottom edge of
the shield is below the plane centerline of the light source (lamp), minimizing the emission of light
rays above the horizontal. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to emit light on
adjacent properties. Onsite lighting within PA I, PA II and PA IV will result in lighting levels consistent
with those of surrounding developments and the requirements of the Municipal Code, and will be
less than significant.
Parking lot lighting shall comply with standards stated in Section 9.100.150 and Section 9.150.080 of
the City Municipal Code, and will only occur in PA III and PA I. 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.
80 -foot -high light poles are proposed in Planning Area III -B (the Wave Basin), in the southwest portion
of the project. PA III -B is located approximately 700 feet north of Avenue 60, 200 feet east of (vacant
and developed) residential estate lots, 1,500 feet east of Madison Street, and 2,600 feet south of
Avenue 58. The light and glare from the 80 -foot light poles may be visible to the residents of the
estate lots located east of PA III -B, and motorists on Avenue 60. Therefore, a Lighting Analysis was
prepared to analyze the projected lighting impacts of the 80 -foot light fixtures surrounding the Wave
Basin (Appendix B). Exhibit 4.1-14, Lighting Analysis Light Direction, illustrates the orientation of the
lights on the Wave Basin facility. The location and orientation of the lights were established and
designed to efficiently illuminate the Wave Basin, while avoiding spillage of light onto the surrounding
areas, which is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1-15, and discussed below.
According to the Lighting Analysis, the recreational lighting in PA III -B would reach a maximum of 35 -
foot -candles. However, this will only be directed or located over the Wave Basin facility. Light spilling
from the 80 -foot lights will not occur outside (horizontally or vertically) of PA III -B, based on the
Lighting Analysis, and displayed in Exhibits 4.1-15 and 4.1-16. This is due to the directional orientation
of the lights, which is downward and toward the Wave Basin, as indicated in Exhibit 4.1-14. In Exhibit
4.1-15 and 4.1-16, the black "0" represents a rounded value of 0 foot-candles (e.g., 0.5 foot-candles
or below), and the red "0" represents no perceived light.
According to the Lighting Analysis and Exhibits 4.1-15 and 4.1-16, the proposed 80 -foot lighting
facilities will not emit light outside of Planning Area III -B. Foot-candles outside of PA III -B are projected
to be 0 footcandles, and therefore, are not projected to impact the surrounding off-site proposed and
existing uses.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-61 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Additionally, the onsite properties adjacent to the proposed Wave Basin, such as the proposed resort
residential units allowed in this area of the Specific Plan, will not be significantly impacted by the light
produced by the Wave Basin. Exhibit 4.1-17 illustrates the footcandles emitted by the proposed light
facilities in relation to the surrounding onsite land uses proposed for the project. Per the exhibit, a
majority of the footcandles on lots that adjoin the Wave Basin are "0", which includes the rounded
value of 0 foot-candles (black) and no perceived light (red). The frontage of two onsite lots located
near the southern portion of the Wave Basin facility (PA III -E) would perceive up to 1 footcandle of
light. One foot-candle is equivalent to the light emitted during twilight, while a full moon at night
produces 0.01 foot-candle. For additional reference, lights included at building frontages and entries
typically produce 2 -foot candles. The requirements established in Section 9.100.150 of the LQMC
establishes that exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as to not shine directly on adjacent
properties. In this case, light will be directed downward onto the Wave Basin, and not at the adjacent
properties. Additionally, appropriate shielding and filtering of outdoor light fixtures are required in
the municipal code. The 1 footcandle emission experienced by two proposed onsite lots is not
considered significant due to the limited amount of light (less than light produced during twilight) and
the fact that these lots are intended to interact with the Wave Basin and other resort uses, as opposed
to low density residential communities. Therefore, the impacts of the Wave Basin lighting will be less
than significant to the onsite properties.
Per Section 9.100.150 of the LQMC, the illumination of outdoor recreational facilities, public and
private, (i.e. the Wave) is exempt from the requirements of this section with the following limitations:
the light fixtures for outdoor recreational facilities shall meet the shielding requirements in the
Municipal Code; and no such outdoor recreational facility shall be illuminated by nonconforming
means after 10:00 p.m. except to conclude a specific recreational or sporting event or any other
activity conducted at a ballpark, outdoor amphitheater, arena, or similar facility in progress prior to
10:00 p.m. Because the operation of the project is governed by the Specific Plan rather than the
Municipal Code, and in order to assure that the operation of the Wave Basin will conclude at 10:00
p.m., compliant with the recreational operational hours allowed by the City of La Quinta, Mitigation
Measure AES -3 has been added. Therefore, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -3,
impacts will be less than significant.
The project -specific Lighting Analysis performed a heat map visualization showing glare from the
fixtures in candela. Exhibit 4.1-18, Projected Glare, illustrates the maximum candela an observer
would see when facing the brightest light source from any direction. High glare (150,000 or more
candela) would only occur in within the footprint of the Wave Basin facility. Significant glare (25,000
to 75,000 candela) is equivalent to high beam headlights of a car, and minimal to no glare (500 or less
candela) is equivalent to a 100 -watt incandescent light bulb. Per the Lighting Analysis, minimal to no
glare would be perceived more than 150 feet from the Wave Basin. Exhibit 4.1-18 shows the Wave
Basin, where the light purple line indicates 150 -foot from the "basin edge", and the light purple dotted
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-62 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
line indicates a 95 -foot minimum from the "wave side". The "basin edge" is the side of the Wave Basin
facility that is closest to PA IV, and PA III G (Back of House). The "wave side" is the area closest to PA
III A, C, D, and E. As indicated in the exhibit glare generated from the "wave side" would not exceed
more than 95 feet from the wave side. As indicated in Exhibit 4.1-19, Projected Glare Overlay, the
glare emitted from the light facilities is anticipated to extend to the resort residential dwellings
immediately adjacent to the Wave Basin facility. Glare perceived at these locations will be between 0
to 50,000 candela, depending on viewing location. As discussed above, these resort residential units
are designed and intended to interact with the Wave Basin and other resort uses, such that some
light and glare spillage is deemed acceptable for these units.
The lighting and glare of the proposed 80 -foot light fixtures will be contained within the Planning Area
boundaries. Due to the direction and orientation of the proposed poles, which is downward and
towards the Wave Basin, the light and glare generated from the fixtures would result in less than
significant impacts. Views of Coral Mountain, the local scenic resource, may be minimally impacted
by the light fixtures depending on location and viewpoint of an individual. For example, for someone
standing immediately adjacent to the Wave Basin, views of Coral Mountain will be obstructed by the
lights and glare emitted from the light fixtures; whereas someone standing further from the Basin
would be less affected by the light and glare of the fixtures. However, as determined previously and
illustrated in Exhibits 4.1-15 through 4.1-18, the project will not result in substantial light and glare
that would adversely affect the nighttime views in the area. Additionally, implementation of
Mitigation Measure AES -3 ensures the operational hours of the recreational lighting fixtures will
comply with the City established operational hours, per Section 9.100.150 of the La Quinta Municipal
Code. The Wave Basin will operate until 10:00 p.m., and lights will be turned off at that time. Thus,
operation of the Wave Basin will not result in significant impacts to daytime or nighttime views in the
area because the lighting is oriented directly onto the Wave Basin, complies with all Municipal Code
requirements for lighting, and avoids any spillage of light or glare outside of the planning area.
High-performance building materials such as natural stone, stucco, architectural concrete, pre -
finished metal panels, cementitious panels or siding, and thermally modified wood siding may be
utilized as part of the design of the project buildings. These materials are non -reflective, and glare
from project structures would be less than significant.
Large expanses of high-performance aluminum, wood, wood -clad, or oxidized steel and operable
door systems scaled to the interior space as well as adjacent covered exterior space are also
encouraged throughout the project. These will be painted or appropriately colored as a part of
building design. The color of roofing materials shall conform to a range of lighter tones, such as gray,
beige, white, sand, and taupe to reduce heat gain and be compatible with the desert landscape,
therefore, avoiding unnatural and bright building facades and preventing daytime glare. The
proposed structures are expected to have natural and light finishes (including white) combined with
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-63 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
earth -tones that do not have highly reflective properties or other conditions that would cause
substantial daytime or nighttime glare.
The use of photovoltaic (PV) panels is also required within the project. By nature, PV panels are
designed to absorb as much of the solar spectrum as possible in order to convert sunlight to
electricity. Glare from the solar panels will not be significant because they do not create a substantial
amount of glint (a momentary flash or bright light) and glare (a reflection of bright light for a longer
duration). Solar panels are constructed of dark -colored (blue or black) materials and are covered with
anti -reflective coatings, and are designed to absorb, rather than reflect, solar radiation. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-64 June 2021
SurfRanch Coral Mountain
I
NUM.
El*. Svatena lisquinnat. Refer to amperage
Draw 0..rt ane/cf.e .140$60 Central Syner• Summary"
Inatd*Pequirsmo.:11m. alums t 356
latatetl wittIn 3 tee I 1ml 0, ...atm.
4.1.1en
"'
17 1 TO.Ls 70
Sept Phas"...i.
.
. •im
ix) in
m
347
. ,
a0
m
Tic i en ma
II< Leo ma a.. a z IA Le z.0 . La
P 17
P1 2 P4 P5 P8 P7 P8
Ill
/P9
p 1
4
A•MR"'"
P13
i
P12'7
/
-."41.41111111111111a111MI
---
13
P18
-1011111111.1
P15 P10
COCO
mu
.041-8 IN .E, 2Co
We Make It Happen
ENGINEERED DESIGN 8,T.Newendoro • File 820S498A_R1 • 07.May-20--
N.T.S.
EQUIPMENT LAYOUT
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drrze, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsulti ngi nc.com
LIGHTING ANALYSIS LIGHT DIRECTION
EXHIBIT
4.1-14
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EQUIPMENT UST FOR AREAS SHOWN
Surf Ranch Coral mountain
7 '7277 : ..!
Le gliirota,GA
,... 1m 7 7'
, 4
GRIDSUMMARy
Ileiolm 30,60rerede
E..e.Gricl
SumAvenges 1.
.M..ntg. m1U.09
am: IM
Calw/01: SMOK•75CP,
,.....m.,... p,
lelnlinarl: W.I, NV
'1.7O -1.,n
Lamirmftlyw LSOtes 1.801:''
11C-LED1.203 .0.000 a120,003 .20.000
MA,01.00 .1,1110 aIM,OW alMgM
,PIPPID.coscosacProco,PAPP‘PPPPPIPPPPOPP,002.oc.,Pilp ::::::: ommagameemmocPae .... p .p ...... PemopcP1P.Elposp ....... poPp ...... Ppmmlmompp ...... p . a ..... pPepompp ......... oposopmmopppem
,boot.opeoptA.,tpost4Doloptsto“opeoa[1“efestofoo.,tve,[olocIppoo[lepefpoh.o[lope.,,As,sopo,,op[3p000pe,op,,pacaop,00[3op,,poopov.Bp,31,p,lop3pot,ppg.ppA,pg.A.Asvog.p.Aao ...... opo
Yne)::::=::::::::::::::=1*,:n=:::::::::::::1*,===:::=1*•:::::=::::::,'1::::!:::::::::::::::::::=:=::::::.r.:::: .... :::
flO'l!'•:'1:'f:::::'3::::'•:::::N::::::=:::===:::::=;=::::::::::==:::::'[==:::=:::::::::::::==:::::::::::::::::::',1:::::::::
.“,LAOlelD0(alfe.,4000[4,0.01,004,0DI•00[03•01,3(>00“00.000[1,0[•011[2001,3"00[•00003X00,(1,0[200,00[300,100000[200(300,10034,[290[O0,000X300[200[•00300X300[2000000 ..... • . 004000040000.00,
,.....,...
..,,,.,,,,..,,..,,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,
Orew,..,...,,,,,,,................/.
:::•;:=:::::::'4:;::::::=1{2 "2::0':;:N
....... 0[400*•04•004•00[2,0.0if,004],"•14400( 00[30P[30 "III" .30.30*000{3“..O0.
.003[POOPM,OPM•flfl•PiDOPM00011Me,(10!•DOP,M[lO•PlOOPADO00,0•00PD00,MDURVDP,DOPM, 110,"”l•
,.....,
.."
—. m,,,mm
, mAte ......... ommoommoommommoommoommoam
....
olevoomvoomoommoomoom„oomo„momm„sm
,amommvoca,mom,Emmommoomommmom. mm“22xx tmmmt,,Ime,m77rmmsmm,,ammamm,rm3am.aamaamemarr? ' :3oomoommoo„oommo mo„ ... °am
!•:", e'" ammo -u mi—
.
m41.:er: ::::
.„--__-..--1-r--...„0„,. . ,......_,..,...„,•. : ...::::::::::::::::::
,"."""".."..."...."""...,. . „.,.........,„„„. .
mmoomm«mm.,„mm„mo ::::::::::: m op ...... ommmo ...... am.
.,....,....„:„.........,... ,„,............„ .,...,........." 0.30“30.1W00,1000[300 300,00[300{30 • ammsmommoommoymmommoom
me:'re:eeemeeenee::::::eme::::::n::::eAn:::::::::e:::::::::me:is:::::::::::::::m::::e:::::::::•=::::::rme.:::::::::::::o::: ....... :: .
0000
MU
SCAM INFEET1 200
We Make It Happen
N.T.S.
, ... ..,
ENGINEERED DESIGN By: tNewendorp • Re #209498kR1 • 07 -May -20
ILLUMINATION SUMMARY
MSA CONSULTING, INC. ffl
LIGHTING ANALYSIS HORIZONTAL (FOOT CANDLE)
EXHIBIT
4. 1-15
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL 1MPACT REPORT
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
EQUIPMENT UST FOR AREAS SHOWN
Surf Ranch Coral mountain
7 '7277 : ..!
Le .18188,,GA
y 811,14 M •
.... 1m 7 7'
W MA80408 4 4 a
n'''''''' " *
GRIDSUMMARY
Um.: W.0,200
U TOWS
la la a
Minnow 0 00
.M..ntg. 278 34
C. 1,00
Cala, Clii: S7,00.7501
808,11..nalrw 70
lehlinarl: W.18 YW
LaminWET,
1.80 nes Mahn L101m
71.0.1.80•12M 8120,,X0 8120,0M t120.000
MA8"I "1,1M alM,OM "1,0IM
Guaranteed Pertamancel The 1.1418.110,1 Oescelbed
,1•8;•Docoscem,c•pacm,oRm".•"8•88888881,888•8•,•••• ::::::: ommagameemmoc.,. .... 8 ... ...... ,....,c•••••18•88 ....... om.o ...... 8988888888 ...... 8 ....... 88888888 ......... 8888888,811.00m Mtde,d8WiltMo,
„.8,•,,,•,,oi,",•oc.,•••aeopopaooem8[88188.4,oe'so•oe•••calopmo8888c.ose.,•4,1. .88 ..... •o•ooe•oso.• ...... opt2op•aos ..... poo•••••ac2opf,p83.8eatlogspop•od•foo•osa.o...os ..... oes ,,,,,,,,,,„„„,„,..,,,,,,,,,„,,,,,c.,,„,,,,,,,„,.,,,...,
,boot•oseoot.o.,smoso•poppoestotaaocoaclase:esso,00.,e4speolo[8188pocletle:Doh•o[lope.,88,58p,,8p88[3os000e,o8,3oacaoo,00[38888oso,o8“8[3o8gloa•ilot,888,,,e8og".88..8:o:Aao ...... op: ,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,
:::::•%::::::::::, 088,84888,8.888.8.888888.80.88.88888.8Mr
fle:!=:::::'3:::::::::N::::::[;°,[;::::==:::::::'•[:::'81::::::::[:=:=::[:::::::[::[:::::[:::::::::::::=::[:::::::::::::::::::',1:::::::::
,, ,,,00coatIcavcomy[000[4,4,Appeoope>po[aa[88a[peocasiokoo“pocaeoca0000ac000[opopouxvo,[a.8“o83.8[3opevooetIo[3oo[3.8[1.8388[3.ociosioao[voo[31,8(a.838,[3ocie,0000ffia ..... • . osuopooaoso..88,
3ope3o8[88 3o8[3882 ' . 2::Vc;::[ 8888a88
....... ocap88““op[io84,,,,epocaoo[8888 oog"" .“8[2.8cooc"8"o"
..loacomeemnorm.cmci.paperapoommepciera nemnancineampeaveramenvoraeopmveampoRapramee
,•••oeo,"Doc000ppocaeocooppoo[8 paw—J.-..!,,os 31,11,a-sa- 3922.,4-4- 3",,-4-
41. ...... wAndi
T:* A
•
.„..,...,..."..............
1,V.c"fi,
•.
: .......... :::
„......
11=1:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::" "::::::::::::;TV1:6:;;;;:::::::::::::: : ::::::::::::::::::::::
.........................., ......"............................"............"..., ............ ....."..". ....."..".........".."........."..
..."""""."".".."„ "..".".."....""."....."."..."... ..... ".""."""" ......... " ..... . .". .......... """" .............. ......".."..."."."
. .
"""."".."."",..."".".........".."...."."".." .... "...."..".."."." .... " ......... "... ...... "".".""."""""""."........".". ....... ""."."...".
0000
MU
SCALE IN FEET 1 .200
We Make It Happen
N.T.S.
..,. wr
ENGINEERED DESIGN By: T. Newendom • Re #209498kR1 • 07-May-20--
ILLUMINATION SUMMARY
MSA CONSULTING, INC. ffl
LIGHTING ANALYSIS VERTICAL (FOOT CANDLE)
EXHIBIT
4.1-16
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL 1MPACT REPORT
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
48
002700 00000 00 '00000
49 I
000000
69
000000
�I
J 0007090001d e� 10
88
00000:
95 I
0000000000 0000006
112 120
1000000 000000:....
00000000000 000
_0000:00000000
000 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a Oa
0000 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o C 0 0 0 0
0,000 ao 000 oaoco 000
:iTo a
0 0470 0
00
0 0 o a
0 0500 0 01
0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 g8 0 00
to 000
J 0 a o 0
s--e—---0--v-�-3� 10
eoa gLp o0obl I1.
Oa
0 0 0 0 0 0
008,0000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000000 000900
000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 o In 200, 0 0 x 0
d10,1
io 00 aoaoc
f�
it
0000000000 0000
a o o a o 0 0 o a a a o a o
a
o >t• 00 ob o ��: �r 0 o a a 0 a o c a a a o a 00 0
a -•1, 1. 00 00000 0000 00
0010 00.10,%.,..i.
00000
000000
ou0000no
J o a H`5 o a o b
eo0oeoon
o a o o e o
o a
a o a o o a o B B o a Oa a 9 0 o
uoonoono00 09700
• B o a_o 0 0 p. _00_6- 0 o
0E� Ao oo
—o -mss" -0
a o 0 0 0 0 o o o a a 0 a o
eo0 0 oouoouo00
y
go � 000000 00000 oaoeoao :�yOo�oCo�o3q'a ob
o�/Joo 0000 000000 v.• 00 • 0000.006
00000000000000 eco=0_000
300000000000000
000000
(0 450 o a
000000
000000
oa320o01
00000_
005000
Loa860oa
000000
,Q
Joa@Ie 0000' �i
0000000:
�e- o -r0.;: �iooa0000
7.77 n
°O86 0
000000
0000000000: 00000
0000000000 00980 a
000000000000000000 o ��000aod:
. mvo c
000000 oa oj�2 co c)
; 01000 000000001,
000aoo a0000coc�
o
10
Io
a o a 00 o o a o 0 a 0000
00 00000000000
o oa0000ooaa000
000000000000000 0 �., �,,,�
o 0.
i• 0. 0000000
0930000000 009p0001. 000000••000J33000 .0
.000000000000000
o a o a o 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 a o 0'0 o 0. 00
o 000000000l�gaooa�'oo 0o/6000
GO 00000000 9000000/000000
oao. 000000000ao.aoo�aa000
0--ra
00 oao ,:a0oo0o
00038000•:004%00
0000 j •l000000
o �: �• :�•RI
0
o -o -o
oa530�o�0
000000��
000000
----
oo 000
0000$000
000000
0 0
00000
830008200
0000000
0 0 0 00 o- R: 6 0 0 0 o a o
opo, �: 2000000
r:v 000000
al•': rp0000ao
al,'
0 o e o o a a a o o
aoo0oo0oao
0000000000
0000000000
o a o 0 0 0 0 0 b09 0 0 a o 0 o c o c 11
•� I0000ao 0000000
00 00 coca
:oa1Y`boo �oeoo0o Doo 73400o
E
`o
obs
a o a a o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0
oo o 0000000 o 00 o0
aoaa000000000ao
e• 00000000000000
0000a000aaaapp aaoa0a0oao
ooa
d..a_o ooa
oar•
0000000
�:�y
0ooao0oaoo :00001800 �ooaococa aaaaoa00000a000
00000 0000000 oaa�aoaaoao
a
00:•00
000 00
000000
oaooeo
00000000000: 0000000 00000 0oaococ 0`Qa 000000o00000
a
"o00 q6o °O0: 0 '0°Owe '0'0 o '0°O°O'0°O'0a
0 /0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
: ,p,0
440
0 0 0
0 0 : 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0100 00 0 0 :t 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0
0
0000 0000000 aa0aaoa0a0oaa
: 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
oo
0 0:
a00000a0a�
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
• 0 0 •
0 0 0 0
0 0 63o 0
: 0 0
500000'10
0 0 0
000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000000 000000�0��- I0 00000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 •! :� : e --o-
at':►� 000000a0o00
0 0 0 0 0 •e o: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/00
l$4
0:0000000 000 000000000000
00
000000000000
@50
000'60001
I0. o
lama0_
:0000000�r
�: � 00000
���.
0000000000: 00:�- o X00
X00
.
COC 00000 X00 ao00oao0
�a
00.000000oa0oa0000a0
0 0 0 00
390
403 a4/aa
42048
e
0 0-J
. _.._..
._ — _._
.-->�
eoaooea o0oa0oao00 :!o 1;/� ao00
1:'30!' �.a ..`l..ef.�
00
...
fecaeo:oa0 a eaoaooa
... .�.. \0 0 000000
0000 0 0 a a o a 0 a a o a a
a o 0. a s:.
000000000
1 I!
�• -ao-oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0000 00 •�0 0 0
a a o 1:28 0 o a 0 0 x 0 0 0 0
oaoo0a0oao
000
000 a
o 00
0-0,
00
00000000000000000000000000000 0006 oo805a oxo
•10q,14040o
000000000o0.000.Oooao0o0o0a0
•
0o0yo0a0o00
0.o
00
000000000000000000oa o00000oa oo 0o pea 094,d
c o0oeooeo01$cae • 000 00 000
1.
0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 a o 0 1. 1 I*-e-ro- o a o o 0 o 0 o o e o 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 • 1i . ri,
: 0 0 0 oy�0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1_'1
0 X 0000.0 0
000X 9 s Lee 6 00
6 a °_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
_L s E L L a a o a a o
em e E
z z E
0 0
0 0
o
.6o
a a
0
C
d�
0 o
0 0
e'W
a o
0 0
e�06
a a
0 0
ob
o a
0 0
4b
a o
0 a
00
0.6
0
0 0 0 0 0 a o o a o o a o 0 0
: o a o o a o a a 0 a o a 0 o a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 o o _ e 00
0", o o a o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 • i 0 0 80 0 0 0 0
0 a a o a o o a o 0 a o 0 0 0 a : 0 0: 5 4 I C s L a e 6 e L g g- 0. 0•; 000 Pte, o:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z
0 8016 s a
OSA O. 0 O. 0 6 8 9 9 S S L L 8 P 9 8 6 P L L 9 S 02
' L 9 S L L Bae6 6 S 0 L L S 9 LO 0 010 0 0: :.
••0110,
9 9 5 :
!PI a
—.
m
600 e 8 S 1.6 o1.
I. n 1 1801.
0000000 `a
00
�/000000
000004:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0:
0000000011
S
9
l Z
1. '.
09000082 L 880099060980,ZLL
68(85969658 96556999L0lelel6l214 ,6 9868(96526
L9 9 6 9 6 2£ 4 9 S S 9 9 4 9 E E 4 9 8012LZ,ZI,LOg,II L 6 6 8 8 E L
S S 4 f E f 4 4 4 4 S S S P 9 5 S 9 9 S S 9 L B 8 8 LI 8 8 8 9 S 9 9
664666Lc080l OLL
9 4 E 4
S 9 S S
LL Epd66,918LL
LLB 8 6 6 6 8 8 8 L
9 L L L 6 6 e L L L 9
9 9 S L B B 6 L S 9 9
62669
S E 4 9
X96
S 9 S S
L 0.19,: 801. e l.HOLS
L L 8 8 6 6 6 6 8 8 L 9
996(8868LL99
9 9 S 9 B 8 8 L 9 9 9 S
i
E 669(64996
£ 09 L
£969969866
6066969866
B OL l
L B B 6 6 60111212,2101
4609990980E LLL 000098800 01000• Z
tldl El5101.98 44SSSS89SceEE98L96B68920,000000
8 9 9£ 6 4 9 4 9 5 5 4 4 E E E 9 6 5 9 L 8 8 L S 2
1866(9969466699654660E66E66L8:C4:
8 5 8 L 9 S S Y 4 S S S 9 9 S 6 4 9 4 9 f f f E 4 S 9 L 2 4:
•0
0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0
0000000.00
0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0
0000000012
Z16L 06608896996606 011 Z I Il OL O(666(999
O6 Ll ZI 1.9 OL O168LL880801 'JL„ZL L10L 0168EL880,01,121.110,9168LLV 80,0L112111.010L
688 L 66 Ol0L11LL1I010186 B L 846644554£4:
000000 000
0 0 0 0 0 0 OL
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
E
L E
L E
L
9 9 9 9 9 all 21E191:lL,Ll e1 LL Ll Ll 61.91 EL EL 915E 610 LL e1 LL LE G S, 91El EL 915, el Ll L el Ll LL Ll SL 91. El EL el 5191. Ll LL el Ll LI. (15191 E1 ZL el 5191.[1(161 Ll LL Ll 6114 El 21 el 519L Ll Ll et Ll Ll Ll 61 el E1 El 9161, LL L16, LI(1919,
_ L 9 5 9 9 LI 0, LI 02 1.2 •26,92 LZ 42 £Z 2222 12 8, 8, LZ 22 £2 EZ 9Z LZ 0222 2222 12 81 8, 12 22 £2 EZ 4 LZ 42 626222 L2 81 8, 12 22 £2 EZ 4Z L2 92 EZ E2 ZZ ,2 el 8,1222E26292 L2 92 EZ E2 22 ,2 B, 81 ,2 ZZ EZ 6202 L2 42 E2 £2 ZZ LZ el 81 ,2 ZZ EZ £2 42 LZ 9Z EZ EZ
: : • : = : 82626292 LZ 026282 6Z 62 62 6Z 6282626292120, SZ 8Z 62 62 6 6Z 6Z 82 62 6Z S2 12 0Z 92 BZ 62 82 6Z 62 62 82 62 6Z SZ l2 02 SZ BZ 62 62 62 6Z 62 BZ 6Z 62 62120262826262626, 628,6262 SZ 120262626,626, 62628282
1(16121. II 6 E 9 e 6 9 9 9 6 4
02 LL 91 LL L 6 5 9 9 L L 4 4
Z 9l Zl 6 5 09 4 4
• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
: 0 0 0 0 0 0 : 0
`` 0000
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 a 0
If:::.:/S'�l•IFJf tY•/M34QYY tY•L(•f • : : :
000 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 : 0 L 60, 8 L 9 8 el 002 41. 42 9( £2 979EZ 9Z 9Z SZ 8Z LZ 42 62 (2 82 92 97,49 0292926,82(202 £2 LZ BZ 92 eLa - - : -
� :L 6L 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
:•......L�.<a..s��. _.:za::�_3�.•.+•.<�.•. r:ter •...•.�-:�•:.-••.xy .. �I���J�1 :. :.
• 0 .r1 @E : u f9 601. .707.172‘27170222
0 0 :_ niIIFF 0 x�0 B L9 9 S S 69, ZZ E2 8, :� L. 61. 1Z 22 92 ,C 9Z 22 Lf 8Z ZZ ZZ ZL b1. LZ Z2 9Z 1.f 9Z ZZ 1.f ez ZZ 22 • .. : .. n zz 9Z if ez ZZ lE 02 ZZ ZZ Sl ZL bl Z ZZ 92 Lf 9Z ZZ 11. 82222261 LL Z,
.. ..1.01 L
4 8, :l ZZ £2 Ol 01. 5 b S 9 L 8
u: I■TTI■II 0
11111:. ���L 0
0 0 0
a O a
00
`E `E 40 •0 �9, `£ 1 v r - v u v u
`e `E Lc `c �E 4E `E `E VZ `6 `E �E LE V2 `E `e u0 Z L z i.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 021 ol4-ti--rz 1. 1 1 Z Z Z Z E lire- -9--6 0 0 0 0 E E 1.S - -e--6
0 Z 114 -e -CE Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o4,b 0 0 0 0 0 O, 1„ 0 0 C 0'. L L L L L 1 L 1 L o 0 0'. 4 ( 1„„ 4 0 0 a' , L, l
00000:300000000000000000 OC00000000000000000000000000000000
0 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 o a a a a a 0 o c o c a a 0 0 o a 0 o a 0 0 0 o a o 0 a o 0 0 o a o 0 a 0 0 0 o a
0000000000 000000 o o C o C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z
t
0
-,tl Z4f I`E Z Z Tt-t*I aF`f.ILE
I'oO u 0 L 1 1 ,,, l 1. J O u t L l
0o0oa 018 000oa0o 0 00 00 o 0
o u u u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 a 0 u u 0 a 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z -c -e--E'�!I Z I`E a -c-1770!1 Ij. Z 1. 1. 0 0 0
l l,,, ,,ZS 0,, L l l l l '.8 0 0 0 1 1 L, C O o 0 Co 0 0' 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a o o a 0000a0oo00oa0o0000o000acoco000000000000oa0
0 a 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 c a a 0 0 0 a 0 o a o 0000
a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 C 0 a ooa o 0 0 0 a 0002._
0 0 �0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 a o 0 0 — •- �-- n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000• 020 • o O o o 0 0 o o o o o 0� Yew o
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n O n n n n n n n n n n - .•••. 0 0 a o 0 o a a o
o 0 o o o 3 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o-rp O-0-•obg
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•
0000000000000000..•- .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 T3 0-0--0 yp• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ••-••• 0 0 0 0
0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0-e-0 0.1_0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0...:•..
00000000000000000000000000000000.•... a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C 0 L .-O-r1 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•••• : 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00.._9 6-a•o e a c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.•.... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 yy 0- .0 o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 a 0 a 0 0 a a o 0 0 a a 0 0 0 o a 0 a a
0000000000000000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a e o a o o a o o a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.08144
N.T.S.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 071 000000000000000000t.00..&000000000 0000000..... ... e o 0 0 0 a o o a o 0 0_}_a 9 t o 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o f o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e
a c o c a c o a a a a o a a o a 0 a a o a 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 a a o 11--17-a-era ii_a_o a o a a a: o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a�.a_e•-9 '7-3- a 0 a o a o a o a a a a o a a o a a a 0 o c 0 c a a aaa a a o a o 0 0 o a 0 a o 0 0 0
e c o c oa a aD o eo o o o o o a o o e o a a 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o—a -1,-. o 0 a a o i -Barr a o 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o a 0 0 o a a 0 o c e c o 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o a o
000000000000000000000.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000030000000000000000000000000000000000000000
o a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o a oao o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a o e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 o e 0 0 a o 0 o e 0 a a a o c e c a 0 a a a o a o 0 o a o a 0 0 0 0 o a o
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• 00000000000000000000000000 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000. 0000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Delve, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
PHOTOMETRIC OVERLAY
EXHIBIT
4.1-17
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ENGINEERED DESIGN BV. Newendorp • File P205498A RS • 07 20
N.T.S.
Surf Ranch Coral Mountain
GLARE IMPACT
4 weldenmlad Sand
RIanGlatmaW,mUotmademaeh
IlgM wade a in 4mt.w. Cannus...ento
vpundmrcmade: aadaaemnnneubele
mus
We Make It Happen.
ENVIRONMENTAL GLARE IMPACT
MSA CONSULTING. INC
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
PROJECTED GLARE
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-18
N.T.S.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
PROJECTED GLARE OVERLAY
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.1-19
4.1 AESTHETICS
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 site's current land use designations include Low Density Residential, General Commercial,
and Open Space Recreational.
As determined in this analysis of project impacts to aesthetic resources, the project would result in
impacts to the existing views of scenic resources, however, the project -building heights and setbacks
would be established to minimize those impacts. Additionally, the project proposes residential and
resort uses that are typical in the City of La Quinta. Furthermore, the existing context of the
surrounding area includes residential communities.
The project site, which is currently undeveloped and vacant, provides largely unobstructed views of
Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains from public rights -of -ways. As determined throughout
this analysis of project impacts on aesthetic resources, the development of the proposed project will
result in impacts to existing views of Coral Mountain. The project's proposed perimeter wall and
landscaping, as well as structures adjacent to the rights-of-way would result in full and partial
obstruction of Coral Mountain depending on viewpoint from the public roads. This is typical of design
in the City of La Quinta, where public views are partially or briefly obstructed by development. The
project will comply with the City standards and guidelines regarding building heights in Image
Corridors within 150 feet of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, as required by the La Quinta Municipal
Code, in order to reduce impacts to scenic resources, Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
Additionally, the La Quinta General Plan outlines various goals, policies and standards for land use
categories, community design features, and building architecture, that impact the visual character of
the City. The project's partial obstruction of views of Coral Mountain, principally the lower slopes, will
contribute to cumulative impacts to scenic resources resulting from development on vacant sites
throughout La Quinta. The project, and other projects planned and permitted by the General Plan,
will obstruct 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 build out of the General Plan, as the overall view of the range will remain visible
throughout the City.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-71 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
Coral Mountain is a locally significant visual resource that is currently visible only from certain
viewpoints in the immediate area of the proposed project. The views of Coral Mountain from
properties to the west and south of the proposed project, including views from the existing Quarry
development, and future projects further south, will be unaffected by either the proposed project or
cumulative development in this part of the City, because of the open space land use designations
applied to lands immediately adjacent to and including Coral Mountain to the west and south of the
project site. Therefore, although views of Coral Mountain will be significantly impacted by the
proposed project, cumulative impacts associated with this scenic resource will be less than significant,
because its visibility will be preserved from other public and private vantage points within and
surrounding the City. Cumulative visual impacts associated with Coral Mountain, therefore, are
expected to be less than significant.
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. Typically,
vacant lots, since they do not have buildings or associated structures, allow motorists and pedestrians
to view the natural landscape without obstructions. The development of these vacant lots would
result in the removal of the opportunities for scenic viewsheds. 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. Build out 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 will be applied to future projects, as they are proposed. 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 The perimeter walls around the low density residential planning areas shall be setback from
the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30 feet (10
feet more than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review
and approval of final perimeter wall and landscape plans to reduce impacts to existing views
of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-72 June 2021
4.1 AESTHETICS
AES -2 All residential structures shall be setback by a minimum of 75 feet from the Madison Street
and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way to reduce impacts to existing views of Coral Mountain and
the Santa Rosa Mountains.
AES -3 The operation of the Wave Basin will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and
the lighting will only be permitted between dusk and 10:00 p.m. to ensure compliance with
the City's outdoor lighting requirements (LQMC 9.100.150).
4.1.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Through compliance with the proposed Specific Plan design guidelines and existing City of La Quinta
ordinances and requirements, as well as the implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -1, AES -2,
and AES -3, development of the project would result in less than significant impacts to aesthetic
resources, with the exception of impacts to scenic vistas of the Santa Rosa range and Coral Mountain.
As to that impact, even with implementation of all feasible mitigation as described above, the project
will have significant and unavoidable impacts to these scenic resources. Approval of the proposed
project will require adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
4.1.8 Resources
1. State Scenic Highways, Caltrans, website https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-
architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways, accessed April 2020.
2. Streets and Highways Code — SHC; Division 1. State Highways, Chapter 2. The State Highway
System, Article 2.5 State Scenic Highways, California Legislative Information,
https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displayText.xhtml?IawCode=SHC&division=1.
&title=&part=&chapter=2.&article=2.5., accessed May 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-73 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.2 Air Quality
4.2 Air Quality
4.2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to discuss the existing air quality setting in the Coachella Valley and
analyze the potential impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project. The air quality
principles, descriptions and supporting analysis rely on the relevant background research and
information made available in various public regulatory and reference documents cited throughout
this section. Reference documents include pertinent sections of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA); 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; Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board, February 2010; Draft Coachella Valley
Extreme Plan for 1997 8 -Hour Ozone Standard, by SCAQMD, September 2020; Coachella Valley
Extreme Area Plan for 1997 8 -Hour Ozone Standard, Public Consultation Meeting Presentation by
SCAQMD, September 2020; Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 8 -Hour Ozone Standard
Fact Sheet, by SCAQMD, September 2020; and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book cited throughout
this section.
At the project -specific level, the analytical and quantitative findings are based on the Coral Mountain
Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), prepared by Urban Crossroads on November 12, 2020
and revised on May 25, 2021. The purpose of the AQIA was to evaluate the potential impacts to air
quality associated with construction and operation of the proposed project, and in doing so, identify
any necessary mitigation measures for complying with the thresholds established by SCAQMD. The
AQIA relied on the most current version of the California Emissions Estimator Model"' (CaIEEMod)
Version 2016.3.2, which serves as an adopted platform to quantify construction emissions and
operational emissions from land development projects. The software is designed to calculate criteria
pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions using widely accepted methodologies from project -specific
and accepted default data inputs. 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, studies commissioned by California
agencies such as the California Energy Commission (CEC) and CalRecycle. The AQIA documentation
referenced herein is provided in the Appendices of this Draft EIR (Appendix C). Please consult Chapter
9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-1 May 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
4.2.2 Existing Conditions
Regional Air Basin Conditions
The project site and its Coachella Valley regional context are situated 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 aligned in a northwest to southeast orientation
stretching from Banning Pass to the Mexican border. The regional climate, as well as the
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 rainfall. Precipitation in the Coachella Valley 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. The region has no 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. Temperatures tend to exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), on the average, for four months
each year, with daily highs near 110 °F during July and August. Summer nights are cooler with
minimum temperatures in the mid-70s. During the winter season, daytime highs are quite mild, but
the dry air is conducive to nocturnal radiational cooling, with early morning lows around 40 °F.
The Coachella Valley floor is exposed to frequent gusty winds. The flat terrain of the valley and strong
temperature differentials, created by intense solar heating, produce moderate winds and deep
thermal convection. Wind speeds exceeding 31 miles per hour (mph) occur most frequently in April
and May. On an annual basis, strong winds (greater than 31 mph) are observed 0.6 percent of the
time and speeds of less than 6.8 mph account for more than one- half of the observed winds.
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 experience
surface inversions almost every day of the year. Inversions in the SSAB are attributed to strong
surface heating, but are usually broken, allowing pollutants to disperse more easily. Weak surface
inversions are caused by cooling of air in contact with the cold surface of the earth at night. In the
valleys and low-lying areas, this condition is intensified by the addition of cold air flowing downslope
from the hills and pooling on the valley floor. In addition, inversions in the SSAB caused by the
presence of the Pacific high-pressure cell can cause the air mass aloft to sink. As the air descends,
compressional heating warms the air to a temperature higher than the air below. This subsidence
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-2 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
inversion can act as a nearly impenetrable lid to the vertical mixing of pollutants. These inversions
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.
In the Coachella Valley, there is a natural sand migration process, called "blowsand," that has direct
and indirect effects on regional air quality. Blowsand produces particulate matter (PM10) in two ways:
(1) by direct particle erosion and fragmentation as natural PM10, and (2) by secondary effects, as sand
deposits on road surfaces. SCAQMD has defined a Coachella Valley Blowsand Zone as the corridor of
land extending two miles on either side of the Interstate 10 (1-10) Freeway, beginning at the SR -111/I-
10 junction and continuing southeast to the 1-10/ Jefferson Street interchange in Indio. Being located
approximately 7 miles south of the 1-10 Freeway, the project site is found outside of this designated
blowsand area but is still exposed to seasonal wind conditions capable of producing fugitive dust from
undeveloped ground conditions.
Local Conditions
The project site is found in the Eastern Coachella Valley, occupying an area with relatively level terrain
and scattered vegetation coverage. This setting occurs on the east side of Coral Mountain and two
engineered flood control dikes (No. 2 and No. 4) that form part of the regional flood control system.
The on-site conditions have been modified by prior agricultural operations and clearing activities that
occurred over multiple decades but have since become inactive or idle. The site has also been altered
by associated dirt roads, paths, and various underground irrigation lines. Like other developed and
undeveloped areas of the Coachella Valley, the project site is exposed to seasonal winds capable of
generating dust emissions. However, the project site is located outside of the Coachella Valley
Blowsand Zone, where the strongest blowsand impacts are known to occur.
4.2.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) is the law that defines EPA's responsibilities for protecting and
improving the nation's air quality. It was first enacted in 1955 and has been amended numerous times
in subsequent years (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the federal air
quality standards (National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)) for managing criteria air
pollutants: 03, CO, NO,,, 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-3 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
control measures that demonstrate how the 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, NO2, SO2, 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 are
regulated in accordance with Title II provisions. These provisions require the use of cleaner burning
gasoline and other cleaner burning fuels such as methanol and natural gas. Automobile
manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons and NOx. NOx is a
collective term that includes all forms of NOx which are emitted as byproducts of the combustion
process.
State
California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) became effective on January 1, 1989 and mandated 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 is achieved through State Implementation Plans (SIP), prepared to
assist regional air quality management districts in meeting the federal and state ambient air quality
standards in accordance with the deadlines specified in the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and emission
reduction targets of the California Clean Air Act.
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. SCAQMD is responsible for controlling emissions primarily from
stationary sources of air pollution, which range from gas stations to large power plants and refineries.
Some consumer products are also considered stationary sources, including house paint, furniture
varnish, and thousands of products containing solvents that evaporate into the air. About 25% of this
area's ozone -forming air pollution comes from stationary sources, both businesses and residences.
The other 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 state
or federal agencies, such as the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-4 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Agency, rather than by local agencies such as the South Coast AQMD. South Coast AQMD develops
and adopts an Air Quality Management Plan, which serves as the blueprint to bring this area into
compliance with federal and state clean air standards. Rules are adopted to reduce emissions from
various sources, including specific types of equipment, industrial processes, paints and solvents, even
consumer products. Permits are issued to many businesses and industries to ensure compliance with
air quality rules. SCAQMD staff conducts periodic inspections to ensure compliance with these
requirements. The test of whether these efforts are working is the quality of the air we breathe.
SCAQMD continuously monitors air quality at 38 locations throughout the four -county area. This also
allows SCAQMD to notify the public whenever air quality is unhealthful.
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), 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. These standards are the levels of
air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health
and welfare. The Coachella Valley region has three permanent air quality monitoring stations
operated by SCAQMD. These are located in Palm Springs (AQS ID 060655001), Indio (AQS ID
060652002), and Mecca (Saul Martinez - AQS ID 060652005). The project site is located approximately
18 miles southeast of the Palm Springs station, 6 miles southwest of the Indio station, and
approximately 11 miles northwest of the Mecca (Saul Martinez) station.
The determination of whether a region's air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by
comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards. The air
quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by the state if the measured ambient air pollutant
levels for 03, CO , SO2 (1 and 24 hour), NO2, PM10, 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 (CaIEPA).
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-5 June 2021
4.2 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 emissions are attributed to
sources that burn fuel, such as automobiles, trucks, heavy construction equipment, farming
equipment and residential heating. Individuals with a deficient blood supply to the heart are the most
susceptible to the adverse effects of CO exposure. The SSAB is in attainment for CO.
Sulfur Dioxide (502) 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 SO2 oxidizes in the atmosphere, it forms
SO4. Collectively, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX). A few minutes of exposure
to low levels of 502 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 502. In contrast, healthy
individuals do not exhibit similar acute responses even after exposure to higher concentrations of
SO2. The SSAB is in attainment for 502.
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) includes Nitric oxide (NO) and Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), which are the primary
oxides of nitrogen, and combined are known as nitrogen oxides. 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 serving as the primary receptor of ultraviolet
light and initiating the photochemical reaction. Short-term exposure to nitrogen dioxide can result in
airway constriction and diminished lung capacity and is highly toxic by inhalation. Populations living
near roadways are more likely to experience the effects of nitrogen oxides due to elevated exposure
to motor vehicle exhaust. The SSAB is in attainment for NO2.
Ozone (03) is a highly reactive and unstable gas that is formed when VOCs and NOx, both 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.
Exposure 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. The SSAB is in non -attainment for the federal 8 -hour 03 standard.
Particulate Matter (PMlo and PM2.$) 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-6 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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.s.
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 is 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.
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.
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
(PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). The state and AAQS and
their attainment status in the SSAB for each of the criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 4.2-1,
Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Under federal and state standards, the SSAB
is currently designated as nonattainment for 03 and PM10.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-7 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status
Pollutant
Averaging
Period
California
Federal
Standards
Attainment
Status
Standards
Attainment
Status
Ozone (03)
1 -hour
0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3)
Nonattainment
-
Nonattainment
8 -hour
0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2)
Annual
Arithmetic
mean
0.03 ppm (57 µg/m3)
Attainment
0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3)
Unclassified/
Attainment
1 -hour
0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3)
0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
8 hours
9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3)
Attainment
9 ppm (10 mg/m3)
Unclassified/
Attainment
1 hour
20 ppm (23 mg/m3)
35 ppm (40 mg/m3)
Sulfur Dioxide
(S02)
1 hour
0.25 ppm
Attainment
0.075 ppm
Attainment
24 hour
0.04 ppm
-
Lead (Pb)
30 -day average
1.5 µg/m3
Attainment-
-
Unclassified/
Attainment
Rolling 3 -month
average
3
0.15 µg/m
Respirable
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
24 hour
50 µg/m3
Nonattainment
150 µg/m3
Nonattainment
Annual
arithmetic mean
20 µg/m3
-
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
24 hour
-
Attainment
35 µg/m3
Unclassified/
Attainment
Annual arithmetic
mean
12 pg/m3
12 pg/m3
Source: California Air Resources Board website at: https.//www.arb.ca.gov/research/aags/aags2.pdf (accessed August 2020) and CARB, "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 (PM10) 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 unpaved roads and construction operations. High -wind natural events are also known
contributors of PM10. 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-8 June 2021
4.2 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 measure 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 in the near future according to the 2016 AQMP.
The project site includes areas that have been disturbed by prior agricultural operations, including
dirt roads. Like other unpaved or undeveloped areas of the Coachella Valley, the undeveloped and
inactive project site is a likely source of seasonal PM10 emissions in the presence of seasonal high
winds events.
03 (Ozone and Ozone Precursors)
The Coachella Valley portion of the SSAB is deemed to be in nonattainment for the 1997 8 -hour ozone
standard. Coachella Valley is located downwind from the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). As such, when
high levels of ozone are formed in the South Coast Air Basin, they are transported to the Coachella
Valley. 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 South Coast Air Basin. SCAQMD has also determined that local sources of air
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-9 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
pollution generated in the Coachella Valley have a limited impact on ozone levels compared to the
transport of ozone precursors generated in SCAB.
In the 2016 AQMP, the attainment target date for the 1997 8 -hour ozone standard was listed as June
15, 2019. However, based on data for higher levels of ozone experienced in 2017 and 2018, it was
determined that the Coachella Valley region could not practically attain the said standard by the
established deadline. Given that additional time is needed to bring the Coachella Valley into
attainment of the ozone standard, SCAQMD submitted a formal request to the U.S. EPA to reclassify
the Coachella Valley from Severe -15 to Extreme nonattainment, with a new attainment date of June
15, 2024. The reclassification ensures that the Coachella Valley will be given the needed extension to
make attainment feasible and prevent the imposition of the non -attainment fees on major stationary
sources. This process would also require SCAQMD to develop or update the SIP documentation to
demonstrate how the area will meet the standard on or before June 15, 2024. Based on the Coachella
Valley Extreme Area Plan for 1997 8 -Hour Ozone Standard, Public Consultation Meeting Presentation,
made September 25, 2020, attainment is expected to be achieved by 2023 resulting from emission
reductions from existing regulations and programs. Recently adopted regulations since the 2016
AQMP provide further assurance for attainment by 2023. Key requirements include an updated
emission inventory, control strategy analysis, and amendments to new source review for NOx and
VOC.
SCAQMD continues to reduce ozone and improve air quality in the Coachella Valley, in part by
providing more than $50 million in grant funding towards paving dirt roads and parking lots, clean
energy projects and cleaner vehicles. Future emission reductions anticipated to occur in the South
Coast Air Basin associated with current and planned regulations on mobile and stationary sources are
expected to contribute to improvements in ozone air quality in the Coachella Valley and lead to
attainment of the standard.
SCAQMD Rules
Among the SCAQMD rules applicable to the project are Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), Rule 403.1
(Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources), and Rule 1113
(Architectural Coatings). Rule 403 requires the use of stringent best available control measures 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 limit for flat coatings
to 50 grams per liter (g/L) which began in July 2008. 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 Best Available Control Measures for all sources
and prohibits all forms of visible particulate matter from crossing any property line. This may include
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-10 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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 PM10 emitted in the ambient air from
man-made fugitive dust sources. The provisions of this rule are supplemental to Rule 403 and apply
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 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.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-11 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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.
Appropriate air quality measures to prevent fugitive dust are required by the City's Fugitive Dust
Control ordinance and plan implementation requirements, which 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 prior to any grading, earth -moving, demolition, or building operation with a disturbed
surface area of more than five thousand (5,000) square feet. 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.
4.2.4 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,
buildout of the Coral Mountain Resort 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, this analysis relies on the findings of the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Air
Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), completed by Urban Crossroads on November 12, 2020 and revised
on March 1, 2021. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential impacts to air quality
associated with construction and operation of the proposed project, and in doing so, identify any
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-12 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
necessary mitigation measures for complying with the thresholds established by SCAQMD. The
quantitative emissions methodology used the most current version of the California Emissions
Estimator Model"' (CaIEEMod) Version 2016.3.2. The SCAQMD has developed regional significance
thresholds for regulated pollutants, as summarized at Table 4.2-2. 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 4.2-2 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (Pounds/Day)
Emission Source
CO
VOC
NO,
SO,
PRAIA)
PM2.5
Construction or
Operation
550
75
100
150
150
55
Source: South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, April 2019
Project Design Features (PDFs)
The project incorporates the following design features and attributes for promoting energy efficiency
and sustainability, which shall be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development
Agreement.
The following PDFs were accounted for in CaIEEMod to reduce emissions associated with each
applicable subcategory:
• 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.
• 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 retail and office buildings,
a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her trip needs. A
description of diverse uses for urban and suburban areas is provided below
• 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-13 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
• Commute Trip Reduction Program is a multi -strategy program that encompasses a
combination of individual measures. It is presented as a means of preventing double -counting
of reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a
maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within
a voluntary program.
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute
trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees. Alternative work schedules could take the
form of staggered starting times, flexible schedules, or compressed work weeks.
• This project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually
service employees' commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and
surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer
purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program
administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a
mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer's purview, and rider charges are normally set
on the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
• 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
2019 Title 24 Standards which results in 30% less energy for non-residential buildings and 53%
less energy for residential use due to lighting upgrades.
• 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 assure a conservative analysis:
• Increasing the vehicle occupancy by ride sharing will result in fewer cars driving the same trip,
and thus a decrease in VMT. The project will include a ride -sharing program as well as a
permanent transportation management association membership and funding requirement.
The project will promote ride -sharing programs through a multi -faceted approach such as:
• Designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride sharing vehicles
• Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride -sharing
vehicles
• Providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides
• The project will implement marketing strategies to reduce commute trips. Information
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-14 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
• sharing and marketing are important components to successful commute trip reduction
strategies. Implementing commute trip reduction strategies without a complementary
marketing strategy will result in lower VMT reductions. Marketing strategies may include:
• New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options
• Event promotions
• Publications
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
• Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes.
• Use of recycled water for common area landscape irrigation.
• 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 include: 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.
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 proposed project site is located within the SSAB and will be subject
to SCAQMD's 2016 AQMP, released in March of 2017 to continue serving as a regional blueprint for
achieving the federal air quality standards. The 2016 AQMP includes the most current strategies to
meet the air quality standards and ensure that public health is protected to the maximum extent
feasible. It also includes a comprehensive analysis of emissions, meteorology, atmospheric chemistry,
regional growth projections, and the impact of existing control measures is updated with the latest
data and methods.
The project is also subject to the regulations and measures originating from the 2003 CV PM10 SIP,
which is designed to address the region's serious nonattainment area for PM10 as described above.
The proposed development will not be defined or permitted under SCAQMD as a major stationery
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-15 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
source. Therefore, the lowering of emissions thresholds from 25 to 10 tons per year of NOx and VOCs
under the updated strategy will not be applicable.
Per the City's General Plan, the project site is designated as both Low Density Residential and Open
Space — Recreational. The Low Density Residential land use 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. The Open Space — Recreational land use designation
designations applies to parks, recreation facilities, and public and private golf courses. With the
approval of a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone, the total development is proposed to
consist of a wave pool, a 150 -key hotel, 104 attached DUs, 496 detached DUs, resort -related
commercial uses and 60,000 sf of retail development.
Currently, state and federal air quality standards are exceeded in most parts of the SSAB. The 2016
AQMP continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS,
as well as explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include
utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co -benefit programs from other sectors, and
developing a strategy with fair -share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels. 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), a
planning document that supports the integration of land use and transportation to help the region
meet the federal CAA requirements. The project's consistency with the AQMP will be determined
using the 2016 AQMP as discussed below. 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: By complying with the established air pollutant emissions thresholds, as
demonstrated in Tables 4.2-6, 4.2-8, and 4.2-13, 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.
Construction Impacts — Consistency Criterion 1: The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers
to are the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized
significance thresholds were exceeded. The project would not exceed the applicable regional
significance thresholds or LST thresholds for construction activity after implementation of the Best
Available Control Methods (BACM AQ -1, AQ -2, and AQ -3). The implementation of BACMs is based on
established SCAQMD rules (403/403.1, 1113, and 445 respectively) already determined to result in a
meaningful reduction in fugitive dust, volatile organic compounds, and ozone precursors. As such
these measures are factored into the air pollutant emissions modeling as a form of mitigation to
quantify the reductions reflected in Tables 4.2-6 and 4.2-13.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-16 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Operational Impacts — Consistency Criterion 1: CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional
or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. As summarized in Table 4.2-8 pertaining to
operational emissions, the project would not exceed the applicable regional significance thresholds
or Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs), Table 4.2-13, for operational activity after implementation
of PDFs, which are integral to the project and provide the equivalent of mitigation measures.
Therefore, the project is determined to be consistent with the first criterion.
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 demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved
within the timeframes required under federal law. Growth projections from local general plans
adopted by cities in the district are provided to the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG), which develops regional growth forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality
forecasts for the AQMP. Development consistent with the growth projections in the City of La Quinta
General Plan is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.
Construction Impacts — Consistency Criterion 2: Peak day emissions generated by construction
activities are largely independent of land use assignments, but rather are a function of development
scope and maximum area of disturbance. Irrespective of the site's land use designation, development
of the site to its maximum potential would likely occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring
during construction activities. Therefore, 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 per the City's General Plan, the project site is
designated as both Low Density Residential and Open Space — Recreational. The project includes a
General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-002) to amend the current General Plan land use designations
from General Commercial, Low Density Residential, Open Space — Recreation, to Neighborhood
Commercial, Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space — Recreation. The
project's build out is proposed to consist of recreational pool (wave pool), a 150 -key hotel, 104
attached DUs, associated resort -commercial development, 496 detached DUs, and 60,000 square feet
of retail development. Although the total number of hotel rooms and residential units do not exceed
the adopted General Plan and SP 03-067, resulting in similar low intensity residential development,
the project will exceed the development intensities allowed within the current land use designation
and zoning designation as a result of the hotel, recreational (wave) and commercial uses. However,
the project would not exceed the applicable regional or localized significance numerical thresholds,
as summarized in Tables 4.2-8, and 4.2-13, with the implementation of PDFs and mitigation measures.
Therefore, the project is determined to be consistent with the second criterion.
The project would not have the potential to result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations as project -
related construction and operational -source emissions would not exceed the regional or localized
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-17 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
significance thresholds for emissions of any criteria pollutant, with the implementation of PDFs and
mitigation measures. As such, the project is considered to be consistent with 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?
The methodology for calculating project -related construction -source and operational -source
emissions as part of the AQIA used CaIEEMod software. The AQIA also used the following factors as
part of the methodology:
Emissions Factors Model (EMFAC): On August 19, 2019, the EPA approved the 2017 version of the
EMFAC web database for use in SIP and transportation conformity analyses. EMFAC2017 is a
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 AQIA
utilizes summer, winter, and annual EMFAC2017 emission factors in order to derive vehicle emissions
associated with project operational activities, which vary by season.
Because the EMFAC2017 emission rates are associated with vehicle fuel types while CaIEEMod vehicle
emission factors are aggregated to include all fuel types for each individual vehicle class, the
EMFAC2017 emission rates for different fuel types of a vehicle class are averaged by activity or by
population and activity to derive CaIEEMod emission factors.
Construction Emissions
Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO,
PM10, and PM2.5. Construction related emissions are expected from the following construction
activities:
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction Paving
• Architectural Coating
The construction phases, durations, and equipment are described in the subsequent headings and
summarized in Tables 4.2-3 and 4.2-4.
Grading Activities
Dust is typically a major concern during grading activities. Because such emissions are not amenable
to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called "fugitive emissions". Fugitive
dust emissions rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-18 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). CaIEEMod was utilized to
calculate fugitive dust emissions resulting from grading activity. Based on information provided by
the project Applicant, the project is anticipated to require 21,920 cubic yards of import. It is our
understanding that the import quantity will be hauled from an on-site location. As a conservative
measure, this analysis assumes a hauling trip length of 1 mile (the length of the project site).
Off -Site IID Improvements
The project will involve off-site improvements within the existing Avenue 58 right-of-way, between
the project site and the existing IID substation facility. All associated ground disturbance will be
subject to the regulatory dust control plan preparation and applicable measures during the period of
installation. As a standard requirement, all disturbed surfaces associated with this work shall be
restored to a stabilized condition; whether it involves restoration of existing pavement, hardscape,
landscaping, or the application of soil binder on native soils.
Construction Worker Vehicle Trips
Construction emissions for construction worker vehicles traveling to and from the project site, as well
as vendor trips (construction materials delivered to the project site) were estimated based on
information from CaIEEMod defaults.
Construction Duration
The modeling conservatively assumes that Phase 1 construction commences in July 2020 and will last
through December 2021; Phase 2 construction will begin September 2022 and last through February
2023; Phase 3 construction will commence July 2023 and last through December 2026. The
construction schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 4.2-3, represents a "worst-case" analysis
scenario because if construction commences or extends any time after the respective dates,
emissions are expected to be the same or potentially reduced because emission factors for
construction decrease as time passes and emission regulations become more stringent. 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 CaIEEMod defaults and the opening year of each respective phase, and a delay
in the commencement of this assumed schedule would not increase project emissions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-19 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-3 Construction Duration
Phase Name
Start Date
End Date
Days
Phase 1 (2021)
Site Preparation
07/01/2020
08/25/2020
40
Grading
08/26/2020
01/26/2021
110
Building Construction
01/27/2021
11/02/2021
200
Paving
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Architectural Coating
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Phase 2 (2023)
Site Preparation
09/19/2022
09/19/2022
1
Grading
09/20/2022
09/21/2022
2
Building Construction
09/22/2022
02/08/2023
100
Paving
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Architectural Coating
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Phase 3 (2026)
Site Preparation
07/09/2023
03/15/2024
180
Grading
03/16/2024
12/20/2024
200
Building Construction
12/21/2024
11/20/2026
500
Paving
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
Architectural Coating
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
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 detailed summary of construction equipment assumptions by phase is provided at Table
4.2-4.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-20 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-4 Construction Equipment Assumptions
Activity
Equipment
Amount
Hours Per Day
Phase 1 (2021)
Site Preparation
Crawler Tractors
4
8
Rubber Tired Dozers
3
8
Grading
Crawler Tractors
2
8
Excavators
2
8
Graders
1
8
Rubber Tired Dozers
1
8
Scrapers
2
8
Building Construction
Cranes
1
8
Crawler Tractors
3
8
Forklifts
3
8
Generator Sets
1
8
Welders
1
8
Paving
Pavers
2
8
Paving Equipment
2
8
Rollers
2
8
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor
1
8
Phase 2 (2023)
Site Preparation
Crawler Tractors
1
8
Graders
1
8
Grading
Concrete/Industrial
Saws
1
8
Crawler Tractors
2
8
Rubber Tired Dozers
1
8
Building Construction
Cranes
1
8
Crawler Tractors
2
8
Forklifts
2
8
Paving
Cement and Mortar
Mixers
4
8
Crawler Tractors
1
8
Pavers
1
8
Rollers
1
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor
1
8
Phase 3 (2026)
Site Preparation
Crawler Tractors
4
8
Rubber Tired Dozers
3
8
Grading
Crawler Tractors
2
8
Excavators
2
8
Graders
1
8
Rubber Tired Dozers
1
8
Scrapers
2
8
Building Construction
Cranes
1
8
Crawler Tractors
3
8
Forklifts
3
8
Generator Sets
1
8
Welders
1
8
Paving
Pavers
2
8
Paving Equipment
2
8
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-21 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Construction Emissions Summary
The estimated maximum daily construction emissions are summarized on Table 4.2-5. Under the
assumed scenarios, emissions resulting from the project construction will exceed criteria pollutant
thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOCs during Phase 1, during painting activity.
Table 4.2-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Without Mitigation)
Year
Rollers
2
8
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor
1
8
Construction Emissions Summary
The estimated maximum daily construction emissions are summarized on Table 4.2-5. Under the
assumed scenarios, emissions resulting from the project construction will exceed criteria pollutant
thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOCs during Phase 1, during painting activity.
Table 4.2-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (Without Mitigation)
Year
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
Summer
Phase 1 (2021)
2020
5.63
64.37
33.32
0.08
11.43
6.63
2021
80.09
77.23
68.59
0.22
12.28
4.88
Phase 2 (2023)
2022
3.44
37.66
17.12
0.04
8.81
5.41
2023
7.60
20.59
14.43
0.04
1.03
0.85
Phase 3 (2026)
2023
3.89
41.91
18.73
0.06
10.40
5.69
2024
10.72
80.88
77.35
0.38
23.77
7.17
2025
30.82
87.72
99.59
0.43
27.93
8.52
2026
30.37
86.59
95.51
0.42
27.93
8.52
Winter
Phase 1 (2021)
2020
5.63
64.25
33.36
0.08
11.43
6.63
2021
79.96
76.97
64.28
0.21
2.66
4.88
Phase 2 (2023)
2022
3.44
37.66
17.07
0.04
8.81
5.41
2023
7.60
20.59
14.38
0.04
1.03
0.85
Phase 3 (2026)
2023
3.89
41.91
18.65
0.06
10.40
5.69
2024
10.57
80.15
69.74
0.35
23.77
7.18
2025
30.65
86.99
90.78
0.40
27.93
8.52
2026
30.23
86.15
87.33
0.40
27.93
8.52
Maximum Daily Emissions
80.09
87.72
99.58
0.43
27.93
8.52
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Construction phases involving paving and architectural coating are sources of VOC and NOX
emissions. The exceedance is caused by the overlapping of paving and architectural coating assumed
in the analysis. The VOC emissions generated would therefore exceed SCAQMD thresholds, and result
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.1-22
June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
in significant impacts requiring mitigation. Through the implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM)
AQ -1, the overlap of these activities will be prevented, such that it will avoid simultaneous emissions
of these pollutants attributed to these activities and therefore will maintain the peak emissions under
the established thresholds and reduce the associated impacts to less than significant levels.
Additionally, MM AQ -2 would be required to decrease localized emissions (please refer to the
subsequent discussions at "Localized Significance") and would further reduce construction
impacts in compliance with the EPA and CARB Tier 3 emissions standards, which are aimed at reducing
motor vehicle emissions, including nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter,
and carbon monoxide. Implementation of these mitigation measures will ensure regional emissions
are below applicable thresholds as summarized on Table 4.2-6.
Table 4.2-6 Overall Construction Emissions Summary (With Mitigation)
Year
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOX
PMlo
PM2.5
Summer
Phase 1 (2021)
2020
1.91
37.46
41.32
0.08
9.67
5.10
2021
74.95
65.41
74.91
0.22
11.83
4.55
Phase 2 (2023)
2022
2.54
30.76
21.98
0.04
8.84
5.19
2023
29.17
16.73
19.55
0.03
0.86
0.73
Phase 3 (2026)
2023
1.46
27.08
30.75
0.06
9.67
5.09
2024
9.84
77.06
84.58
0.38
23.59
7.06
2025
30.11
86.61
107.14
0.43
27.86
8.50
2026
29.66
85.78
103.07
0.42
27.86
8.49
Winter
Phase 1 (2021)
2020
1.91
37.33
41.36
0.08
9.67
5.10
2021
74.83
65.15
70.60
0.21
11.83
4.50
Phase 2 (2023)
2022
2.54
30.76
21.93
0.04
8.84
5.19
2023
29.16
16.72
19.49
0.04
0.86
0.73
Phase 3 (2026)
2023
1.46.
27.08
30.67
0.06
9.67
5.09
2024
9.68
76.32
76.96
0.35
23.60
7.06
2025
29.93
85.88
98.34
0.40
27.86
8.50
2026
29.51
85.04
94.89
0.40
27.86
8.49
Maximum Daily Emissions
74.95
86.61
107.14
0.43
27.86
8.50
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-23 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Operational Emissions
Operational activities associated with the proposed project will result in emissions of VOCs, NOX, SOX,
CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Operational emissions would be expected from Area Sources, Energy Sources,
and Mobile Sources.
Area Source Emissions
Area source emissions include the following types of products and activities.
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 CaIEEMod.
Hearths/Fireplaces: The emissions associated with use of hearths/fireplaces were calculated based
on assumptions provided in the 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 estimates were adjusted to
remove wood burning stoves and fireplaces. As the project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule
445, the removal of wood burning stoves and fireplaces is not considered "mitigation" although it
must be identified as such in CaIEEMod in order to treat the case appropriately.
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
Energy Source Emissions include:
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 is
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-24 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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. As a conservative measure, the unmitigated analysis herein assumes compliance
with the 2016 Title 24 Standards and no additional reduction for compliance with the 2019 standards
have been taken.
Mobile Source Emissions
Project mobile source air quality emissions are primarily dependent on overall daily vehicle trip
generation. Trip characteristics available from Coral Mountain Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis
Report were utilized in this analysis. Trip lengths were determined based on the regional travel
demand model. The Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM) was used to estimate
trip lengths for the residential and non-residential portions of the project. Based on RIVTAM, the
residential portion of the project results in an average trip length of 5.55 miles and the non-residential
portion of the project results in an average trip length of 15.17 miles.
The use of a travel demand model is supported by substantial evidence since the information
contained in the model is specific to the region and for the land use type being proposed.
Furthermore, the use of travel demand models is also a recommended practice that is being
promoted by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in their updated CEQA guidelines
with respect to Senate Bill 743. Specifically, the latest technical advisory documentation published by
OPR (December 2018 see Page 30-31) explicitly states that:
"...agencies can use travel demand models or survey data to estimate existing trip lengths and
input those into sketch models such as CaIEEMod to achieve more accurate results. Whenever
possible, agencies should input localized trip lengths into a sketch model to tailor the analysis to
the project location."
The procedure described by OPR in their SB 743 technical advisory is precisely the method that has
been used to calculate trip lengths for purposes of this analysis.
Fleet Mix: A vehicle fleet mix consistent with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Transportation project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol was
used in this analysis. It should be noted that this fleet mix is more appropriate than the CaIEEMod
default fleet mix, which includes classes of vehicles that are unlikely to access the project site,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-25 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
furthermore, the type of vehicles accessing the project site are anticipated to be primarily passenger
cars, consistent with the Caltrans recommendations. The fleet mix utilized in this analysis is as follows:
Light Duty Autos = 69%
Light Duty Trucks = 19.4%
Medium Duty Trucks = 6.4%
Heavy Duty Trucks = 4.7%
Motorcycles = 0.5%
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 break and tire wear particulates.
The emissions estimates for travel on paved roads were calculated using CaIEEMod.
Operational Emissions Summary:
The estimated operational -source emissions without PDFs are summarized on Table 4.2-7. project
operational -source emissions have the potential to exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of
significance for emissions of VOCs during Phase 3 activities.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-26 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-7 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions without PDFs
Operational Activities -
Summer Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PMI)
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Area Source
29.23
2.28
11.69
0.01
0.23
0.23
Energy Source
0.39
3.60
2.87
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
15.09
41.09
106.34
0.27
23.59
6.71
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 1)
44.72
46.98
120.89
0.31
24.09
7.22
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Area Source
29.98
2.28
11.67
0.01
0.23
0.23
Energy Source
0.40
3.62
2.88
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
16.30
41.99
122.60
0.35
31.74
8.71
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 2)
46.68
47.89
137.15
0.39
32.25
9.22
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Area Source
59.77
10.52
53.73
0.07
1.08
1.08
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.77
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
27.08
76.61
184.76
0.55
52.99
14.53
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 3)
87.49
92.84
242.25
0.64
54.51
16.06
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Operational Activities -
Winter Scenario
Emissions
(lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
1 CO
SOx
PMI)
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Area Source
29.23
2.28
11.69
0.01
0.23
0.23
Energy Source
0.39
3.60
2.87
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
11.13
43.11
83.20
0.25
23.59
6.71
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 1)
40.75
48.99
97.75
0.28
24.09
7.22
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Area Source
29.98
2.28
11.67
0.01
0.23
0.23
Energy Source
0.40
3.62
2.88
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
11.99
43.90
96.07
0.31
31.74
8.71
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 2)
42.37
49.80
110.62
0.35
32.25
9.23
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-27
June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Phase 3 (2026)
Area Source
59.77
10.52
53.73
0.07
1.08
1.08
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.77
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
19.93
79.85
149.38
0.49
52.99
14.53
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 3)
80.34
96.08
206.87
0.59
54.51
16.06
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Table 4.2-7 above indicates that VOC emissions during Phase 3 and without PDF implementation will
potentially exceed the established threshold as the project approaches buildout. Area and mobile
sources are the primary contributor of VOC emissions.
The following table provides operational emissions after factoring in PDFs and MM AQ -3. These PDFs
are site design elements and operations recognized by the California Air Pollution Control Officers
Association (CAPCOA) for providing project -level emissions reductions through a reduced automobile
use (reduced vehicle miles traveled), energy efficiency, and other area source reductions, which will
be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement. These measures
are programmed into CaIEEMod to be activated when applicable to the project. The following PDFs
apply: pedestrian connections, mixture of land uses, walkability and connectivity design elements,
commute trip reduction program, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-
sponsored shuttles, compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards, compliance with SCAQMD Rule 445, on-
site photovoltaic electricity supply (15%), and waste diversion per AB 939. In addition, MM AQ -3
establishes a paint VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter to perform interior and exterior re -painting
during the life of the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-28 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-8 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions with PDFs and Mitigation Measures
Operational Activities -
Summer Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PM2o
PM2.s
Phase 1 (2021)
Area Source
23.48
0.12
10.77
5.70E-04
0.06
0.06
Energy Source
0.39
3.60
2.87
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
14.79
38.50
95.82
0.24
20.56
5.85
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 1)
36.67
42.23
109.46
0.26
20.89
6.19
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Area Source
24.09
0.12
10.75
5.70E-04
0.06
0.06
Energy Source
0.40
3.62
2.88
0.02
0.28
0.28
Mobile Source
16.02
39.89
110.61
0.31
27.63
7.59
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 2)
40.51
43.63
124.24
0.33
27.96
7.92
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Area Source
46.69
0.57
49.49
2.62E-03
0.27
0.27
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.78
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
27.01
76.09
182.04
0.53
51.87
14.22
Project Daily Emissions
(Phase 3)
73.99
79.53
220.44
0.51
46.47
13.27
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
The estimated operational -source emissions with PDFs and MM AQ -3 are summarized on Table 4.2-
8. After implementation of PDFs and MM -AQ -3, project operational -source emissions will be reduced
to less than significant levels.
Special Events
The project proponent anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at this location involving
attendance of no -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day, with the peak hourly trips arriving or departing on
Saturdays (up to 4 events per year).
The estimated operational -source emissions from special event activities without PDFs are
summarized on Table 4.2-9. Special event operational -source emissions have the potential to
exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance for emissions of VOCs and NOx. A majority
of the VOC emissions (65%) are attributed to area sources and the remaining 35% to mobile
(vehicular) and energy sources. A majority of NOx emissions (85%) are attributed to mobile (vehicular)
sources and the remaining to area and energy sources.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-29 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-9 Special Event Operational Activity without PDFs
Operational Activities -
Summer Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
Area Source
59.77
10.52
53.73
0.07
1.08
1.08
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.78
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
31.57
92.23
235.13
0.72
70.36
19.29
Special Events Daily Emissions
91.98
108.47
292.63
0.82
71.84
20.82
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
Operational Activities -
Winter Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
Area Source
59.77
10.52
53.73
0.07
1.08
1.08
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.78
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
23.33
96.31
187.04
0.65
70.36
19.29
Special Events Daily Emissions
83.74
112.54
244.54
0.75
71.89
20.82
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
Table 4.2-9 above indicates that VOC and NOx emissions resulting from the special event operations
will exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance, and result in a significant impact. VOC emissions are
primarily attributed to area and mobile sources. NOx emissions are primarily attributed to mobile
sources. With incorporation of PDFs and MM AQ -3, determined by the California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association (CAPCOA) methodology to result in reduced automobile use (reduced vehicle
miles traveled), energy efficiency, and other area source reductions, the VOC and NOx emissions will
be reduced below their respective thresholds, as demonstrated in Table 4.2-10 below. The PDFs
consist of pedestrian connections, mixture of land uses, walkability and connectivity design elements,
commute trip reduction program, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-
sponsored shuttles, compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards, compliance with SCAQMD Rule 445, on-
site photovoltaic electricity supply (15%), and waste diversion per AB 939. In addition, MM AQ -3
establishes a paint VOC content limit of 50 grams for paint products.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-30 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-10 Special Event Operational Activity with PDFs and Mitigation
Operational Activities -
Summer Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PM20 1
PM2.5
Area Source
40.44
0.57
49.49
2.62E-03
0.27
0.27
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.78
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
31.08
88.26
214.30
0.64
61.79
16.95
Special Events Daily Emissions
72.16
94.54
267.57
0.67
62.52
17.67
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Operational Activities -
Winter Scenario
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC
NOx
CO
SOx
PMio
PM2.5
Area Source
40.44
0.57
49.49
2.62E-03
0.27
0.27
Energy Source
0.65
5.71
3.78
0.04
0.45
0.45
Mobile Source
22.88
92.01
172.92
0.57
61.79
16.95
Special Events Daily Emissions
63.97
98.29
226.18
0.61
62.52
17.67
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
The estimated operational -source emissions from special event activities after implementation of
PDFs are summarized on Table 4.2-10. After implementation of PDFs and MM AQ -3, special event
operational -source emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance for
emissions of any criteria pollutant.
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
The analysis makes use of SCAQMD's 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 raised by the public
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-31 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Applicability of LSTs for the Project
For this project, the appropriate Source Receptor Area (SRA) for the LST analysis is the SCAQMD
Coachella Valley 2 (SRA 30). LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced look-
up tables for projects less than or equal to 5 acres in size.
In order to determine the appropriate methodology for determining localized impacts that could
occur as a result of project -related construction, the following process is undertaken:
• CaIEEMod is utilized to determine the maximum daily on-site emissions that will occur during
construction activity.
• The SCAQMD's Fact Sheet for Applying CaIEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds and
CaIEEMod User's Guide Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMod is used to determine the
maximum site acreage that is actively disturbed based on the construction equipment fleet
and equipment hours as estimated in CaIEEMod.
• If the total acreage disturbed is less than or equal to five acres per day, then the SCAQMD's
screening look -up tables are utilized to determine if a project has the potential to result in a
significant impact. The look -up tables establish a maximum daily emissions threshold in
lbs/day that can be compared to CaIEEMod outputs.
• If the total acreage disturbed is greater than five acres per day, then LST impacts are
appropriately evaluated through dispersion modeling.
Emissions Considered
SCAQMD's LST Methodology clearly 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 CaIEEMod "on-site" emissions outputs were considered.
The "acres disturbed" for analytical purposes are based on specific equipment type for each
subcategory of construction activity and the estimated maximum area a given piece of equipment
can pass over in an 8 -hour workday. The equipment -specific disturbance rates were obtained from
the CaIEEMod user's guide, Appendix A: Calculation Details for CaIEEMod (October 2017). It should
be noted that the disturbed area per day is representative of a piece of equipment making multiple
passes over the same land area. In other words, one Rubber Tired Dozer can make multiple passes
over the same land area totaling 0.5 acres in a given 8 -hour day.
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.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-32 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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 to the project site where an individual could remain for
24 hours (in this case the nearest residential land use) has been used to determine construction and
operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10 and PM2.5, since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds
are based on a 24-hour averaging time.
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." Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest
industrial/commercial use to the project site is used to determine construction and operational LST
air impacts for emissions of NO2 and CO
Project -Related Sensitive Receptors
Receptors in the project study area are described below and shown on Figure 4.2-1. Localized air
quality impacts were evaluated at sensitive receptor land uses nearest the project site. 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), as such receptor locations are located in outdoor living areas at
10 feet from any existing or proposed barriers or at the building facade, whichever is closer to the
project site.
R1: Located approximately 154 feet north of the project site, R1 represents existing
residential homes north of 58th Avenue.
R2: Location R2 represents the existing residential homes located north of the project site
at roughly 181 feet, on the north side of 58th Avenue.
R3: Location R3 represents the existing residential homes northeast of the intersection at
58th Avenue and Madison Street at approximately 231 feet from the project site.
R4: Location R4 represents the existing residential homes southeast of the intersection at
58th Avenue and Madison Street at approximately 185 feet from the project site.
R5: Location R5 represents the existing residential homes on the east side of Madison
Street at approximately 352 feet from the project site.
R6: Location R6 represents the existing residential home located north of Calle Conchita
about 134 feet from the project site.
R7: Location R7 represents the existing residential homes located north of Avenue 60
about 37 feet from the project site.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-33 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
R8: Location R8 represents the existing residential homes located south of Avenue 60
about 38 feet from the project site.
R9: Location R9 represents the existing residential homes located about 1,451 feet west
of the project site along Quarry Ranch Road.
R10: Location R10 represents the existing residential homes located about 1,378 feet
northwest of the project site north of 58th Avenue.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.1-34 June 2021
LEGEND:
Receptor Locations
—* Distance from receptor to Project site boundary (in feet)
Existing 6 -Foot High Barrier
N.T.S.
�► URBAN
CROSSROADS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
SENSITIVE RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.2-1
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Consistent with the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, the nearest sensitive receptor
used to evaluate construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10, PM2.5, NO2,
and CO is represented by R7 which is an existing residential home located 37 feet/11 meters from the
project site. It should be noted that the LST Methodology explicitly states that "It is possible that a project
may have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to
the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters." As such, the 25 -meter
distance were used to evaluate construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10,
PM2.5, 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 the residents of previous phases of development. Phase 2 building construction
activities will impact on-site sensitive receptors in Phase 1. Similarly, Phase 3 building construction
activities will impact on-site sensitive receptors in Phases 1 and 2. To assess the potential impacts of
phased building construction activity, a 25 -meter distance was used for evaluation of localized PM10,
PM2.5, NO2, and CO. The SCAQMD look -up tables for the Coachella Valley were used to obtain the
localized emission threshold to which the Phase 2 and Phase 3 grading emissions could be compared.
The comparison of Phase 2 and Phase 3 grading emissions against the SCAQMD thresholds is provided
in Table 4.2-14.
Localized Construction -Source Emissions
Construction -Source Emissions LST Analysis
Since the total acreage disturbed is less than five acres per day for the site preparation phase and the
grading phase, the SCAQMD's screening look -up tables were utilized in determining impacts. It should
be noted that since the Zook -up tables identifies thresholds at only 1 acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres, linear
regression has been utilized, consistent with SCAQMD guidance, in order to interpolate the threshold
values for the other disturbed acreage and distances not identified in the look -up tables. Table 4.2-11
describes the thresholds used in the analysis.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-36 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Table 4.2-11 Maximum Daily Localized Emissions Thresholds
Pollutant
Construction
Operation
Localized Thresholds
Phase 1(2021)
NOx
248 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
266 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
CO
1,796 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
1,961 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
PMlo
11 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
12 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
PM2.5
7 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
7 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
Phase 2 (2023)
NOx
132 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
162 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
CO
878 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
1,089 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
Mho4
lbs/day (Site Preparation)
6 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
PM2.5
3 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
4 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
Phase 3 (2026)
NOx
248 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
266 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
CO
1,796 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
1,961 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
PMlo
11 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
12 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
PM2.5
7 lbs/day (Site Preparation)
7 lbs/day (Grading)
N/A
Localized Construction -Source Emissions
Tables 4.2-12 identifies the localized impacts at the nearest off-site receptor (R7) location in the vicinity
of the project area. Without mitigation, localized construction emissions would not exceed the
applicable SCAQMD LSTs for emissions for NOX, CO or PM2.5, but would exceed PM10 emissions by 0.28
pounds per day during Phase 1 of construction. The applicable LST for PM10 is 11 pounds per day and
the estimated emissions are 11.28 pounds per day. Of the total amount of 11.28 pounds per day
potentially emitted during Phase 1 of construction, approximately 8.49 pounds (75%) are attributed to
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-37 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
fugitive dust generated from ground disturbance, while the remaining 2.79 (25%) pounds correspond to
particulate matter generated by off-road construction equipment. Phase 2 and Phase 3 construction
would involve relatively smaller disturbance areas not resulting in exceedances for this criteria pollutant.
The PM10 exceedance during Phase 1 represents a potentially significant impact that requires
mitigation.
Table 4.2-12 Localized Significance Summary of Construction without Mitigation
On -Site Site Preparation Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Maximum Daily Emissions
63.79
22.39
11.28
6.59
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
248
1,796
11
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
YES
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Maximum Daily Emissions
11.25
4.03
0.81
0.41
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
132
878
4
3
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Maximum Daily Emissions
41.82
18.27
10.25
5.64
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
248
1,796
11
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
On -Site Grading Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Maximum Daily Emissions
60.88
32.40
6.48
3.74
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
266
1,961
12
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Maximum Daily Emissions
23.58
11.86
3.99
2.31
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
162
1,089
6
4
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Maximum Daily Emissions
38.95
27.64
5.57
2.91
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
266
1,961
12
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Table 4.2-13 describes the localized impacts at receptor location R7 after the implementation of
Mitigation Measure AQ -2. MM AQ -2 requires that for construction equipment greater than 150
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.2-38
June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
horsepower (>150 HP), off-road diesel construction equipment must comply with EPA/CARB Tier 3
emissions standards and that all construction equipment must be tuned and maintained in accordance
with the manufacturer's specifications. This mitigation measure will be effective at lowering the daily
PM10 emissions from 11.28 pounds per day to 9.52 pounds per day, solely through the reduction in
diesel particulate matter attained from the use of engines meeting the Tier 3 emissions standards. With
implementation of MM AQ -2, construction emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for
any criteria pollutant, and impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Table 4.2-13 Localized Significance Summary of Construction with Mitigation
On -Site Site Preparation Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
CO
PMlo
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Maximum Daily Emissions
27.05
30.31
9.52
5.06
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
248
1,796
11
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Maximum Daily Emissions
6.86
7.68
0.67
0.30
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
132
878
4
3
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Maximum Daily Emissions
27.01
30.27
9.52
5.05
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
248
1,796
11
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
On -Site Grading Emissions
Emissions ( bs/day)
NOx
CO
PMlo
PM2.5
Phase 1 (2021)
Maximum Daily Emissions
33.97
40.40
5.35
2.81
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
266
1,961
12
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 2 (2023)
Maximum Daily Emissions
14.28
16.53
3.55
1.94
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
162
1,089
6
4
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Maximum Daily Emissions
33.95
40.38
5.34
2.81
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
266
1,961
12
7
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-39
June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
To evaluate the potential impacts of Phase 2 and Phase 3 grading on on-site sensitive receptors, such as
Phase 1 and Phase 2 dwelling units that become occupied, the mitigated emissions from those
construction activities were compared against the lowest localized emission thresholds for the closest
distance interval available in the SCAQMD Look -Up Tables for the Coachella Valley. Table 4.2-14 below
provides the mitigated emissions resulting from Phase 2 and Phase 3 grading activities. The applicable
construction -source mitigation measures are MM AQ -1 aimed at preventing paving activity from
overlapping with architectural coating activities and MM AQ -2 aimed at ensuring that equipment greater
than 150 horsepower complies with EPA/CARB Tier 3 emissions standards and to ensure that all
construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
Without mitigation, Phase 2 and Phase 3 construction activities would result in LST emissions
exceedances constituting a potential impact. After MM AQ -1 and MM AQ -2 mitigation, these emissions
would be reduced to less than significant.
Table 4.2-14 Localized Significance Summary
of Phase 2 and Phase 3 Construction with Mitigation
On -Site Grading Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.s
Phase 2 (2023)
Maximum Daily Emissions
14.28
16.53
3.55
1.94
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
132
878
4
3
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Phase 3 (2026)
Maximum Daily Emissions
33.95
40.38
5.34
2.81
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
132
878
4
3
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
NO
NO
NO
Operational -Source Emissions LST Analysis
The project is proposed to consist of a wave pool, a 150 -key hotel, 104 attached resort residential DUs,
associated resort commercial development, 496 detached DUs, 60,000 sf of retail. 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 idling at
the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse buildings). The proposed project does not include such
uses, and thus, due to the lack of significant stationary source emissions, no long-term localized
significance threshold analysis is needed.
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 applicable because the proposed land uses do not include major stationary sources
of air pollution. Therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors will be less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-40 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include:
• Agricultural uses (livestock and farming)
• Wastewater treatment plants
• Food processing plants
• Chemical plants
• Composting operations
• Refineries
• Landfills
• Dairies
• Fiberglass molding facilities
Considering that the project does not include any of the above -noted facilities or operations, the low
density residential, open space recreational, tourist commercial, wave basin, and general commercial
uses associated with the project are not expected to operate in a manner resulting in other emissions
leading to objectionable odors. 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) associated with the
proposed project's (long-term operational) uses. The construction odor emissions would be temporary,
short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of
construction and are thus considered less than significant. It is expected that project -generated refuse
would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City's
solid waste regulations. The proposed project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402
to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed project
construction and operations would be less than significant.
4.2.5 Cumulative Impacts
As previously discussed, the Coachella Valley region is designated as nonattainment for Ozone and
PM10. 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
SCAQMD clearly 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-41 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
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
significance thresholds are the same. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project -
specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant."
Therefore, this 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 SSAB
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 -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional
thresholds after implementation of mitigation. Therefore, project construction -source emissions would
be considered less than significant on a project -specific and cumulative basis.
Operational Impacts
The project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that
project operational -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional
thresholds after implementation of mitigation. Therefore, project operational -source emissions would
be considered less than significant on a project -specific and cumulative basis.
4.2.6 Mitigation Measures
Construction -Source Mitigation Measures
AQ -1: During Phase 1 of construction, the paving installation activity shall not overlap with the
architectural coating (building painting) activity. That prohibition shall be included on all building
plans.
AQ -2: For equipment greater than 150 horsepower (>150 HP), off-road diesel construction equipment
that complies with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-42 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
Tier 3 emissions standards shall be required, and all construction equipment shall be tuned and
maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
Operational -Source Mitigation Measures
AQ -3: The project will require the use of low VOC paints for re -painting and maintenance of exterior
structures consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113(not to exceed 50 grams per liter VOCs for interior
and exterior building envelope re -painting). Under federal and state law, SCAQMD is under a
legal obligation to enforce air pollution regulations. These regulations are primarily meant to
ensure that the surrounding (or ambient) air meets federal and state air quality standards. The
South Coast AQMD also has broad authority to regulate toxic and hazardous air emissions, and
these regulations are enforced in the same manner as those which pertain to the ambient air
quality standards.
Standard Regulatory Requirements/Best Available Control Measures
Measures listed below (or equivalent language) shall appear on all project grading plans, construction
specifications and bid documents, and the City shall ensure such language is incorporated prior to
issuance of any development permits. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules
that are currently applicable during construction activity for this project include but are not limited to
Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) (2) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). It should be noted that these Best
Available Control Measures (BACMs) are standard regulatory requirements.
BACM AQ -1: The contractor shall adhere to applicable measures contained in Table 1 of Rule 403
including, but not limited to:
• All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25
mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions.
• The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the
project are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete
coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid-
morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day.
• The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are
limited to 15 miles per hour or less.
BACM AQ -2: The following measures shall be incorporated into project plans and specifications as
implementation of SCAQMD Rule 1113 (3):
• Only "Low -Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)" paints (no more than 50 gram/liter (g/L) of
VOC) consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113 shall be used.
BACM AQ -3: The project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 445, which prohibits the use of wood
burning stoves and fireplaces in new development.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-43 June 2021
4.2 AIR QUALITY
4.2.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of the Project Design Features, mitigation measures, and best available control
methods, the proposed project is anticipated to have a less than significant impacts.
4.2.8 Resources
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 Extreme Area Plan for 19978 -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. Coral Mountain Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), prepared by Urban Crossroads
on November 12, 2020 and revised on March 1, 2021
5. Draft Coachella Valley Extreme Plan for 1997 8 -Hour Ozone Standard, by SCAQMD, September
2020.
6. Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003
7. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD), March 2017
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.2-44 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.3 Biological Resources
4.3 Biological Resources
4.3.1 Introduction
Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Biological Resources
Assessment and CVMSHCP Consistency Analysis prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA; May 2021),
Focused Bat Survey Report prepared by LSA (May 2021), the City of La Quinta General Plan, and the
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan.
This section discusses the biological resources that may be present on the project site or in the vicinity
and assesses impacts on these resources from the development associated with implementation of the
Coral Mountain Resort project ("project"). The Biological Resources Assessment and CVMSHCP
Consistency Analysis ("biological report"), and the Focused Bat Survey Report are included in the
Appendices of this Draft EIR as Appendix D.1 and D.2. Please consult Section 9.0 for a glossary of terms,
definitions, and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
4.3,3 Existing Conditions
Physical Conditions
The project site is south of Avenue 58 and west of Madison Street in the City of La Quinta. Surrounding
land uses include residential development to the north and east, vacant land to the west, and CVWD
water recharge ponds to the south.
Topography and Soils
Within the project boundaries, the project site is relatively flat within elevations ranging from
approximately 72 feet below mean sea level to 65 feet above mean sea level. The tallest peak of Coral
Mountain, west of the project, is approximately 400 feet above mean sea level.
According to the project specific biological report, a mosaic of soils occurs in the project area and are
mapped by the Soil Conservation Service as:
• CdC: Carsitas gravelly sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes;
• CpA: Coachella fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
• CsA: Coachella fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
• GaB: Gilman loamy fine sand; 0 to 5 percent slopes;
• GbA: Gilman fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
• Ip: Indio fine sandy loam;
• Ir: Indio fine sandy loam, wet;
• Is: Indio very fine sandy loam;
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-1 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
• It: Indio very fine sandy loam, wet;
• MaB: Myoma fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes; and
• RO: Rock outcrop.
Vegetation
Vegetation within the project site is best described as Desert Saltbush scrub, Tamarisk scrub, and
Mesquite Hummock (CVMSHCP 2007). Land is disturbed in the southern and northeast portions of the
project site and a stand of blue palo verde is present in the eastern portion of the study area. Dominant
species include fourwind saltbush, bush seepweed, athel, and common Mediterranean grass (Schismus
barbatus). The majority of the project site was previously agricultural land. As a result, the Desert
Saltbush scrub is fairly disturbed throughout the site.
Wildlife
Common wildlife species observed within the project site during the field surveys include common raven,
mourning dove, and greater roadrunner. Special status animal species observed within the boundary of
the project site include pallid bat, western yellow bat, western mastiff bat, and pocketed free -tailed bat.
Jurisdictional Waters
There are no natural springs or water sources on or near the project site. There are no jurisdictional
waters, lakes, rivers, or streambeds onsite. The project property does not contain, nor is it adjacent to,
federally protected wetlands, marshes, or other drainage features. No blue -line stream corridors
(streams or dry washes) occur in the project area.
4.3.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to the biological resources are discussed below.
Federal
Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act (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) (USFWS 2020).
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 of listed animals except by permit for certain
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-2 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
conservation purposes. "Take" is defined by the ESA as to harm, harass, wound, trap, collect, kill or the
attempt to engage in such activity.
Habitat Conservation Plans
Habitat Conservation Plans (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 an
incidental take permit. They describe the anticipated effects of the proposed taking; how those impacts
will be minimized or 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 (USFWS 2020).
The Federal Migratory Bird Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) governs the obligation of the United States under
international treaties and conventions for the protection of migratory birds. The MBTA governs the
taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts and nests.
The MBTA prohibits the take, possession, import, export, transport, selling, purchase, barter, or offering
for sale, purchase or barter, any migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except as authorized under
a valid permit by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was established in 1972 as the basic structure for regulating discharges of
pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. 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 a pipe or man-made ditch, 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.
State
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-3 June 2021
4.3 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. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(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 a project site and determine whether the proposed project could have a potentially
significant impact on such species. In addition, CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed
project that may affect a candidate species.
California Fish and Game Code
Under Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511 of the Californian 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. Section 4150 of the California Fish and Game
Code prohibits take or possession of all nongame mammals or parts thereof. Any activities resulting in
bat mortality (e.g., the destruction of an occupied bat roost that results in the death of bats), disturbance
that causes the loss of a maternity colony of bats (resulting in the death of young), or various modes of
nonlethal pursuit or capture may be considered "take" as defined in Section 86 of the California Fish and
Game Code.
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.
Regional and Local
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
The Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan
(CVMSHCP) is a regional multi -agency conservation plan that provides for the long-term conservation of
ecological diversity in the Coachella Valley region of Riverside County. Significant progress has been
made in plan implementation since state and federal permits were issued in September and October
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-4 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
2008. The term of all HCP permits is 75 years, which is the length of time required to fully fund
implementation of the CVMSHCP.
The CVMSHCP includes an area of approximately 1.1 million acres in the Coachella Valley region within
Riverside County. A major amendment to the Plan, completed in 2016, added 770 acres to the Plan's
Conservation Areas. The plan area boundaries were established to incorporate the watersheds of the
Coachella Valley within the jurisdictional boundaries of CVAG and within Riverside County. Indian
Reservation Lands are not included in the CVMSHCP although coordination and collaboration with tribal
governments has been ongoing.
The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is the agency responsible for CVMSHCP
implementation. The CVCC is comprised of elected representatives of the Local Permittees including
Riverside County, the cities of Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La
Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage, the Coachella Valley Water District, Mission
Springs Water District, and the Imperial Irrigation District. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (County Flood Control), Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District
(County Parks), and Riverside County Waste Resources Management District (County Waste) are also
Local Permittees.
Other Permittees include three state agencies, the California Department of Parks and Recreation (State
Parks), the Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy (CVMC), and the California Department of
Transportation (CalTrans). A major amendment to include the City of Desert Hot Springs and Mission
Springs Water District as Permittees was approved by the CVCC in March 2014 and all local Permittees
approved the Major Amendment in 2014. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) approved the Major
Amendment in December 2015. The final approval of the Major Amendment by California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) was in August 2016. The CVMSHCP involves the establishment of an MSHCP
Reserve System to ensure the conservation of the covered species and conserved natural communities
in perpetuity. The existing conservation lands managed by local, state, or federal agencies, or non-profit
conservation organizations form the backbone of the MSHCP Reserve System (CVMSHCP Annual Report
2019).
4.3.3 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:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-5 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
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?
Methodology
Methods used for the Biological Resources Assessment (referred to as "biology report" herein), included
a literature review and a field survey. The biology report has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan (CVMSHCP), and the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts.
Field Surveys
General Biological Surveys
LSA biologists conducted a general field survey within the project site on September 11, 2019. Weather
conditions consisted of clear skies, temperatures ranging from 73 to 91 degrees Fahrenheit, and winds
ranging from 3 to 5 miles per hour. Additionally, a follow up general biological field survey was conducted
on April 28, 2021. Weather conditions consisted of clear skies, temperatures ranging from 58 to 89
degrees Fahrenheit, and winds ranging from 3 to 5 miles per hour. The entire project site was surveyed
on foot. Notes were taken on general site conditions, vegetation, and suitability of habitat for various
special-interest elements. All plant and animal species observed or otherwise detected during the survey
were noted and listed in the appendices of the biology report.
Focused Bat Surveys
LSA biologists, including a bat specialist, performed focused bat surveys within the project site. These
focused bat surveys comprised two parts. The first part consisted of a daytime bat roosting habitat
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-6 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
assessment conducted on November 13 and 14, 2020. During this assessment, potential bat roosting
sites (e.g., trees, rock outcrops, and buildings) within the project site were visited on foot and examined
for features such as crevices or recessed spaces that may be suitable for use as day- and/or night -
roosting habitat. Suitable features were inspected for the presence of bats or any bat sign (e.g., guano,
urine staining, or vocalizations) indicating current or past use of an area by roosting bats. The second
component consisted of nighttime acoustic and emergence surveys conducted on April 27 and 29, 2021,
at locations that were identified as containing suitable maternity -roosting habitat during the habitat
assessment. Although there are no official protocols for bat surveys in California, all surveys followed
unofficial standard protocols applicable to the site conditions. Each nighttime acoustic and emergence
survey was initiated approximately 20 minutes before sunset and continued until one full hour after
sunset to determine whether a given roost feature was used by bats for roosting. All nighttime surveys
were performed under warm weather conditions appropriate for the season, winds were below 5 miles
per hour, and there was no risen moon. All bat species observed or otherwise detected within the project
site during the surveys are discussed in the focused bat survey report (Appendix D.2).
Literature Review
A literature review was conducted to assist in determining the existence or potential occurrence of
special-interest plant and animal species within the project site in the project vicinity. A records search
of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Natural Diversity Database (NDDB) Rarefind 5
(2019), and California Native Plant Society's Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (California
Native Plant Society [CNPS] v7-18) for the La Quinta, Indio, Martinez Mountain, and Valerie, California
USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangles was conducted on August 16, 2019. A review of the Final Recirculated
CVMSHCP (CVAG 2016) was also conducted in order to determine CVMSHCP consistency and
conservation measures that apply to the proposed project, and to reference vegetation types within the
project site. Geographic Information System (GIS) software was used to map the project location, habitat
types, land uses, etc.
Special -Status Species
Legal protection for special-interest species varies widely, from the comprehensive protection extended
to listed threatened/endangered species, to no legal interest at present. The CDFW, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), local agencies, and special-interest groups, such as the CNPS, publish watch lists of
declining species. Species on watch lists can be included as part of the special-interest species
assessment. The special-interest species analysis revealed 49 special-interest species with the potential
to occur within the limits of the project site. These are listed below ("Special -Status Species Summary").
Threatened/Endangered Species
The following seven federally/State listed species were identified as having the potential to be present
in the project vicinity according to State databases:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-7 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
• Coachella Valley milkvetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var. coachellae): Federally listed as
Endangered and CVMSHCP covered species;
• Triple -ribbed milkvetch (Astragalus tricarinatus): Federally listed as Endangered and CVMSHCP
covered species;
• Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi): Federally listed as Endangered;
• Desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius): Federally and State -listed as Endangered and CVMSHCP
covered species;
• Desert slender salamander (Batrachoseps major aridus): Federally and State -listed as
Endangered;
• Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard (Uma inornate): Federally listed as Threatened, State -listed as
Endangered, and CVMSHCP covered species; and
• Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis Canadensis nelsonii) (peninsular Distinct Population Segment):
Federally listed as Endangered, State -listed as Threatened, California Fully Protected Species, and
CVMSHCP covered species.
Habitat within the project site was considered unsuitable for six of the seven species identified, and none
of these species were found to be present on-site. These species include the Triple -ribbed milkvetch,
Casey's June beetle, Desert pupfish, Desert slender salamander, Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, and
the Peninsular bighorn sheep. Marginally suitable habitat for Coachella Valley milkvetch was found to be
present within the project site.
Non -Listed Special -Interest Species
Of the 42 other non -listed special-interest species identified and discussed in the biology report, 18
species are considered absent based on their lack of suitable habitat, seven species are considered to
have a low probability of occurrence, seven species are considered to have a moderate probability of
occurrence, and five species are considered to have a high probability of occurrence. Five species were
detected within the project site. The following non -listed special-interest species have a moderate to
high probability to occur, or were observed within the project site:
• Slender cottonheads (Nemacaulis denudate var gracilis);
• Flat -tailed horned lizard (Phryosoma macalli);
• Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia);
• Ferruginous hawk (Buten regalis);
• Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus);
• Black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura);
• Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei);
• California leaf -nosed bat (Macrotus californicus);
• Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus);
• Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis);
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-8 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
• Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus);
• Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis);
• Pocketed free -tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus);
• Big free -tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis);
• Pallid San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallaz pallidus); and
• Palm Springs round -tailed ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus terecicaudus chlorus).
Nesting bird species, including special-interest species identified below ("Special -Status Species
Summary"), with potential to occur are protected by California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503,
3503.5, and 3800, and by the MBTA. These laws regulate the take, possession, or destruction of the nest
or eggs of any migratory bird or bird of prey. However, the USFWS has recently determined that the
MBTA should apply only to "... affirmative actions that have as their purpose the taking or killing of
migratory birds, their nests, or their eggs" and will not be applied to incidental take of migratory birds
pursuant to otherwise lawful activities.
Special -Status Species Summary
Plants
Chaparral sand -verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita): This species is found in sandy areas (generally flats
and benches along washes) in chaparral and coastal sage scrub, and improbably in desert dunes or other
sandy areas, below 1,600 meters (5,300 feet) elevation. This species is absent due to the absence of
suitable habitat in the project site.
Coachella Valley milk -vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var coachellae): This species is found in sandy
areas, typically in coarse sands in active sand fields, adjacent to dunes, along roadsides in dune areas, or
along the margins of sandy washes, in Sonoran Desert scrub at 60 to 655 meters (200 to 2,150 feet)
elevation. Although some coarse sand areas are present within the project site, the probability of
occurrence of this species onsite is low because direct observation of the species or its sign in the project
site or immediate vicinity did not occur during previous biological studies; the species was not sighted
by other qualified observers; the species was not reported by the NDDB, published by the CDFW; and
the presence or location information for the species was not provided by private groups.
Lancaster milk -vetch (Astragalus preussii var. laxiflorus): This species is found in alkaline clay flats,
gravelly or sandy washes, and along draws in gullied badlands, in chenopod scrub below about 700
meters (2,300 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site, due to the absence of suitable
habitat.
Triple -ribbed milk -vetch (Astragalus tricarinatus): This species habitat occurs in metamorphic rock
outcrops weathering into gravelly soil in semi -desert chaparral, or (probably as waifs) at the edges of
boulder -strewn desert washes and adjacent slopes in rocky incised canyons in Joshua tree woodland and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-9 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Sonoran Desert scrub; known from the west edge of the desert at 450 to 1,200 metes (1,500 to 3,900
feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site, due to the absence of suitable habitat.
California ayenia (Ayenica compacta): This species occurs in rocky canyons and sandy gravelly washes
from 150 to 1,095 meters (500 to 3,600 feet) elevation in desert scrub. This species is not present at the
site, due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Little -leaf elephant tree (Bursera microphylla): This species occurs in the rocky slopes and washes in
Sonoran Desert scrub at 200 to 700 meters (600 to 2,300 feet) elevation. This species is not present at
the site, due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis claryana): This species occurs in sandy soils in creosote bush scrub of the
Sonoran and Mojave deserts at 0 to 465 meters (0 to 1,500 feet) elevation. There is a low probability for
this species to occur at the project site, because although sandy soils are present in some areas of the
project site, direct observation of the species or its sign in the project site or immediate vicinity did not
occur during previous biological studies; the species was not sighted by other qualified observers; the
species was not reported by the NDDB, published by the CDFW; and the presence or location information
for the species was not provided by private groups.
California ditaxis (Ditaxis serrata var californica): This species occurs in sandy washes and alluvial fans
in Sonoran desert scrub at 30 to 1,000 meters (100 to 3,300 feet) elevation. This species is not present
at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Harwood's eriastrum (Eriastrum harwoodii): This species occurs desert dunes, 125 to 915 meters (410
to 3,002 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Santa Rosa Mountain leptosiphon (Leptosiphon floribundus ssp. hallii): This species occurs in Sonoran
desert scrub in desert canyons at 900 to 1,280 meters (2,950 to 4,190 feet) elevation. This species is not
present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
California marina (Marina orcuttii var orcuttii): This species occurs in rocky soils and gravelly hillsides in
pinyon and juniper woodlands, Sonoran desert scrub, and chaparral at 1,050 to 1,160 meters (3,400 to
3,800 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Spear -leaf matelea (Matelea parvifolia): This species occurs in rocky ledges and species in Mojavean
and Sonoran desert scrub at 430 to 1,095 meters (1,400 to 3,600 feet) elevation. This species is not
present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Slender cottonheads (Nemacaulis denudata var gracilis): This species occurs in coastal or desert dunes,
sandy mesquite hummocks, or similar sandy sites at -50 to 400 (560) meters (-160 to 1,3000 [1,800] feet)
elevation. Blooms mostly late March to mid-May (annual herb). This species has a moderate probability
to occur at the project site due to the presence of sandy mesquite hummocks.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-10 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Slender -stem bean (Phaseolus filiformis): This species is present in annual or perennial vine in Sonoran
desert scrub found in gravelly washes bordered by Creosote bush -dominated rocky slopes; 125 meters
(410 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Deep Canyon snapdragon (Pseudorontium cyathiferum): This species occurs in rocky sites in Sonoran
desert scrub at 0 to 800 meters (0 to 2,600 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site due to
the absence of suitable habitat.
Desert spike -moss (Selaginella eremophila): This species occurs in shaded sites in gravelly soils and
among rocks or in crevices from 200 to 900 (2,425?) meters (700 to 3,000 [8,00?] feet) elevation in
Sonoran desert scrub. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Coves's cassia (Senna covesii): This species occurs in dry, sandy desert washes and slopes in Sonoran
desert scrub at 200 to 1,070 meters (700 to 3,50 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site
due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Purple stemodia (Stemodia durantifolia): This species occurs in Sonoran desert scrub, mostly in mesic
sandy areas, at 180 to 300 meters (600 to 1,000 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the site
due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Sonoran maiden fern (Thelypteris puberula var sonorensis): This species occurs in seeps and along
streams in meadows at 50 to 610 meters (170 to 2,000 feet) elevation. This species is not present at the
site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Mecca aster (Xylorhiza cognata): This species occurs in steep slopes of arid canyons in sandstone and
clay in Sonoran desert scrub at 20 to 400 meters (70 to 1,3000 feet elevation). This species is not present
at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Invertebrates
Casey's June beetle (Dinacoma caseyi): This species occurs in areas associated with alluvial sediments,
typically in Carsitas gravelly sand (CdC), riverwash, or possibly Carsitas cobbly sand (ChC) of broad, gently
sloping alluvial fans at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Known distribution is an area of less than
324 hectares (800 acres) in southern Palm Springs within the Palm Canyon alluvial floodplain and
eastward to East Palm Canyon Drive. The project site is outside of the species' known geographic range.
Coachella giant sand treader cricket (Macrobaenetes valgum): This species occurs in wind-swept sand
dune ridges, spring -dampened sandy areas. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of
suitable habitat.
Cheeseweed moth lacewing (Oliarces clara): This species is located in areas associated with creosote
bush in desert scrub. Although creosote bush is present within the project area, there is a low probability
of occurrence because direct observation of the species or its sign in the project site or immediate vicinity
did not occur during previous biological studies; the species was not sighted by other qualified observers;
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-11 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
the species was not reported by the NDDB, published by the CDFW; and the presence or location
information for the species was not provided by private groups.
Fish
Desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius): This species occurs in desert backwater areas, springs, streams,
and pools. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Amphibians
Desert slender salamander (Batrachoseps major aridus): This species inhabits steep -walled desert
canyons with permanent water seeping from fractured bedrock. This species is not present at the site
due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Reptiles
Flat -tailed horned lizard (Phrynosoma mcalli): This species occurs in fine sand in desert washes and flats
with vegetative cover and ants, generally below 180 meters (600 feet) elevation. This species has a
moderate probability to occur at the project site since fine sand in flats with vegetative cover is present.
Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard (Uma inornata): This species occurs in fine, loose, windblown sand
(dunes), interspersed with hardpan and widely spaced desert shrubs. This species is not present at the
site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Birds
Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia): This species occurs in open country in much of North and South
America. Burrowing owls usually occupies ground squirrel burrows in open, dry grasslands, agricultural
and range lands, railroad rights-of-way, and margins of highways, golf courses, and airports. This species
often utilizes man-made structures, such as earthen berms, cement culverts, cement, asphalt, rock, or
wood debris piles. The project site provides suitable habitat for the species, therefore, there is a high
probability of occurrence of burrowing owls at the site.
Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis) (wintering): This species forages in open fields, grasslands in
agricultural areas, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, fringes of pinyon -juniper habitats, and other open
country in western North America. There is a moderate probability for this species to occur at the project
site due to the presence of suitable foraging habitat.
Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) (nesting): This species occurs in open country in much of North America.
This species nests in cliffs or rocky outcrops; forages in open arid valleys and agricultural fields. There is
a moderate probability for this species to occur at the project site due to the presence of suitable
foraging habitat.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-12 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura): This species nests in wooded desert wash habitat
containing mesquite, palo verde, ironwood, and acacia. They may also occur in areas with salt cedar,
especially when adjacent to native wooded desert wash habitat, and in desert scrub in winter. There is
a high probability for this species to occur at the project site due to the presence of suitable nesting
habitat.
Vermilion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus) (nesting): This species is a rare, local, year-long resident
along the Colorado River, especially in vicinity of Blythe, Riverside County. They are a sporadic breeder
in desert oases west and north to Morongo Valley and the Mojave Narrows, San Bernardino County.
Formerly bred in coastal San Diego County. Nesters inhabit cottonwood, willow, mesquite, and other
vegetation in desert riparian habitat adjacent to irrigated fields, irrigation ditches, pastures, and other
open, mesic areas. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Crissal thrasher (Toxostoma crissale): This species occurs in dense thickets of shrubs or low trees in
desert riparian and desert wash habitats. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of
suitable habitat.
Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei): This species inhabits sparsely vegetated desert flats, dunes,
alluvial fans, or gently rolling hills having a high proportion of saltbush (Atriplex spp.) or cholla
(Cylindropuntia spp.), often occurring along small washes or sand dunes. It prefers dense thorny shrubs
(most often saltbush or cholla) for nesting. This species, although uncommon, is a local resident in low
desert scrub throughout most of the Mojave Desert, extending up into the southwestern corner of the
San Joaquin Valley. The breeding range in California extends from these areas into eastern Mojave, north
into the Owens Valley and south into the lower Colorado Desert and eastern Mojave. Only the San
Joaquin Valley population of this species is considered a Bureau of Land Management Sensitive Species
or California Species of Concern. There is a moderate probability for this species to occur at the project
site due to the presence of suitable habitat.
Mammals
California leaf -nosed bat (Macrotus californicus): This species day roosts primarily in caves and mines,
and foraging habitat is predominantly in desert washes containing palo verde, ironwood or smoke trees.
Suitable caves for day roosting are present in the rock outcrops associated with Coral Mountain within
the project site. Known roosts for this species are present in natural caves along the shoreline of Lake
Cahuilla in the vicinity, and there is a high probability that this species roosts and/or forages within the
project site.
Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii): This species roosts in the foliage of broad -leafed trees or shrubs
within streams or fields, in orchards, and occasionally urban areas; commonly roosts in mature
cottonwoods and sycamores. Also documented roosting in mature eucalyptus trees and palm trees.
Strongly associated with riparian corridors, but has also been documented in desert scrub habitats. There
is a low probability that this species occurs in the project site.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-13 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus): This species roosts in the foliage of coniferous, deciduous, and evergreen
trees and shrubs, often at the edge of a clearing. Typically roosts near the ends of branches
approximately 3-12 meters above the ground. Suitable large trees present for day roosting, including
athel (Tamarix aphylla). Unlikely to be present during the summer months. There is a low probability
that this species occurs in the project site.
Western yellow bat (Lasiurusxanthinus): This species is found mostly in desert and desert riparian areas
of the southwest U.S., but also expanding its range with the increased usage of native and non-native
ornamental palms in landscaping. Individuals typically roost amid dead fronds of palms in desert oases,
but have also been documented roosting in cottonwood trees. Forages over many habitats. Suitable
roosting habitat is present in native and non-native ornamental palms within and surrounding the
project site. This species was detected in the project site during the focused bat surveys.
Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis): This species roosts in crevices within bridges, buildings, culverts, cliff
crevices, caves, mines, and trees, typically near a perennial water source. Also documented roosting in
swallows nests. Suitable trees for day roosting present. Crevices in adobe building are also suitable for
roosting. May forage over open water in golf courses and water impoundments immediately adjacent
to the project site. There is a high probability that this species occurs in the project site.
Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus): This species roosts in crevices in rocky outcrops and cliffs, caves, mines,
hollows or cavities of large trees, and anthropogenic structures such as bridges and buildings; may also
roost near the ground in rock piles. Foraging habitat includes grassland, open scrub, open forest, and
gravel roads. Suitable day roosting habitat is present within the project site in large palo verde trees with
crevices and cavities as well as in rocky outcrops at Coral Mountain, and suitable foraging habitat is also
present. During the focused bat surveys, this species was visually observed emerging from roosts in the
rock outcrops, as well as foraging in palo verde stands at the western portion of the study area.
Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus): Occurs in many open, semi -arid to arid habitats,
including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc.; roots in crevices
in vertical cliff faces, high buildings, and tunnels, and travels widely when foraging. Suitable roosting
habitat is present in the rock outcrops associated with Coral Mountain, and this species was detected in
the project site during the focused bat surveys.
Pocketed free -tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus): This species occurs in areas usually associated
with cliffs, rock outcrops, or slopes. May roost in buildings (including roof tiles) or caves. Suitable roosting
habitat is present in the rock outcrops associated with Coral Mountain, and this species was detected in
the project site during the focused bat surveys.
Big free -tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis): This species has a sporadic distribution in California and
roosts mainly in crevices in cliffs, although there is some documentation of roosting in buildings, caves,
and tree cavities. Found in desert shrub, woodlands, and evergreen forests. Suitable roosting habitat is
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-14 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
present in the rock outcrops associated with Coral Mountain, and this species has a moderate potential
of occurring in the project site.
Pallid San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax pallidus): This species are found in sandy herbaceous
areas, usually associated with rocks or coarse gravel in desert wash, desert scrub, desert succulent scrub,
pinyon -juniper woodlands, etc. in desert border areas of Southern California into Mexico. There is a
moderate probability for this species to occur at the project due to the presence of suitable habitat.
Palm Springs pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris bangsii): This species' primary habitat in the
Coachella Valley occurs in dunes and mesquite hummocks associated with honey mesquite and, to a
lesser extent, dunes and hummocks associated with creosote or other vegetation. Although suitable
habitat occurs at the project site, these areas are limited in size and isolated within the project site.
Therefore, there is a low probability for this species to occur at the project site.
American badger (Taxidea taxus): This species' primary habitat requirements seem to be sufficient food
and friable soils in relatively open uncultivated ground in grasslands, woodlands, and desert. There is a
low probability for this species to occur at the project site because although friable soils are located
onsite, direct observation of the species or its sign in the project site or immediate vicinity did not occur
during previous biological studies; the species was not sighted by other qualified observers; the species
was not reported by the NDDB, published by the CDFW; and the presence or location information for
the species was not provided by private groups.
Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsonii) (peninsula Distinct Population Segment): This
species occurs on open desert slopes below 1,220 meters (4,000 feet) elevation from San Gorgonio Pass
south into Mexico. Optimal habitats include steep -walled canyons and ridges bisected by rocky or sandy
washes, with available water. This species is not present at the site due to the absence of suitable habitat.
Project Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Seven federally/state listed species were identified as having the potential to occur in the project vicinity.
These include the Coachella Valley milkvetch, triple -ribbed milkvetch, Casey's June beetle, desert
pupfish, desert slender salamander, Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard and the Peninsular bighorn
sheep. As described above, only one has potential suitable habitat on-site: the coarse sand areas provide
a marginally suitable habitat for the Coachella Valley milkvetch (CVMV), which, although not found to
be present on-site, is a covered species under the CVMSHCP. The CVMSHCP does not require avoidance
and minimization measures for the CVMV. Through participation in the CVMSHCP via payment of
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-15 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
development fees, the project would mitigate for any impacts to the CVMV. The project is considered
unsuitable habitat for the other six species.
The project -specific biology report also identified ten non -listed special-interest species that have a
moderate to high probability to occur within the project site due to suitable habitat. These include
slender cottonheads, flat -tailed horned lizard, burrowing owl, ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, black -
tailed gnatcatcher, Le Conte's thrasher, California leaf -nosed bat, western yellow bat, pallid bat, western
mastiff bat, pocketed free -tailed bat, pallid San Diego pocket mouse and the Palm Springs round -tailed
ground squirrel. Of these species, western yellow bat, pallid bat, western mastiff bat, and pocketed free -
tailed bat were observed during the field surveys.
Due to the disturbed nature of the site, surrounding development, and lack of presence or signs of these
species (other than certain bat species identified above), impacts from the project are anticipated to
have a less than significant effect on these non -listed special-interest species. Nesting bird species,
including the special-interest species described above, are protected by California Fish and Game Code
and by the MBTA. Further discussion and mitigation for nesting birds is provided in discussion d), of this
Biological Resources section.
The project will be required to make offsite site improvements for electrical power to the site. These
improvements would take place within IID's existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-of-
way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA West. Avenue 58 is a fully paved secondary arterial. The
IID substation yard has been heavily disturbed and impacted by development of other substation units,
vehicles and maintenance materials. Neither of these areas provide a suitable habitat for any sensitive
or special status species.
Therefore, the impact would be less than significant with payment of the CVMSHCP fee.
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
There are no jurisdictional waters regulated pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and no lakes,
rivers, or streambeds regulated pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code by the CDFW are present
within the limits of the proposed project. Since significant wash vegetation, riparian vegetation, or other
sensitive natural communities (identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the
CDFW or US Fish and Wildlife Service) does not occur at the project site, impacts of project development
will be less than significant. No jurisdictional waters are located within the existing and developed IID
offsite improvement areas. Therefore, the project will have no impacts on jurisdictional waters, lakes,
streambeds, or riparian vegetation.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-16 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
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
The site does not contain, nor is adjacent to, federally protected wetlands, marshes or other drainage
features. No blue -line stream corridors (streams or dry washes) are shown on U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) maps for the project site nor are there botanical indicators of such corridors. As a result,
implementation of the project would not result in the direct removal, filling or other hydrological
interruption to federally protected wetlands. The proposed IID offsite improvement areas are fully
developed and are not in or near a protected wetland nor do they contain any blue -line stream corridors.
Therefore, the project will have no impacts on federally protected wetlands.
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 site
Movement and habitat fragmentation occurs when a proposed action results in a single, unified habitat
area being divided into two or more areas such that the division isolates the two new areas from each
other. Isolation of habitat occurs when wildlife cannot move freely from one portion of the habitat to
another or from one habitat type to another. There is no evidence of migratory wildlife corridors or
native wildlife nursery sites on the project site or adjacent properties. Since the project property does
not lie within a CVMSHCP-designated wildlife corridor and the project site is adjacent to development,
the proposed project is not anticipated to have significant impacts related to habitat fragmentation and
regional wildlife movement. However, the project site has the vegetation to potentially support nesting
birds which are protected by California Fish and Game Code and by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
An intensive effort was made to locate the burrowing owl, a species protected under the MBTA, but not
functionally covered under the CVMSHCP.
Although burrowing owls were not observed onsite during the field investigation, the site provides
suitable habitat for the species and the owls can take up residence on the site at any time. Development
of the site while burrowing owls are present would have a potentially significant impact on this species.
Therefore, mitigation is required to reduce the impact to less than significant levels. Mitigation in the
form of a pre -construction burrowing owl survey (Mitigation Measure BIO -1) shall be required using an
accepted protocol (as determined by CDFW). Prior to construction, a qualified biologist will survey the
construction area to determine presence of the species. Should the species be identified, the biologist
shall establish parameters to protect the species consistent with the requirements in place at the time
development is proposed. These could include the establishment of buffer areas up to 500 -feet outside
the project limits for burrows in use by burrowing owl. This mitigation is included as BIO -1 and would
assure impacts are reduced to less than significant levels.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-17 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The project site contains suitable roosting and foraging habitat for multiple bat species. Native and non-
native ornamental palms on and surrounding the project site could provide suitable roosting habitat for
bats, including the western yellow bat. Roosting habitat suitable for use as maternity roosts, which are
native wildlife nursery sites, is also present in rock outcrops associated with the portions of Coral
Mountain that is situated within and adjacent to the project site. Locations of suitable roosting habitats
are illustrated in Exhibit 4.3-1. In April 2021, a nighttime acoustic and emergence survey was conducted
by LSA as part of a larger focused bat survey effort. The nighttime survey included a combination of
acoustic and exit count methods and took place during the early phase of the bat maternity season
(March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley) to enable detection of maternity -roosting bats. However,
not all bat species are fully aggregated in their maternity roost sites in April, when the initial survey was
conducted. Therefore, to avoid impacts to all potential bat species which may occur on the site,
additional maternity -season surveys will be performed in June 2021 to maximize the probability of
detection of maternity roosts for all bat species, as provided in Mitigation Measure BIO -2. If maternity
roosts are identified within the project area, a significant impact would occur. To reduce these impacts
to less than significant levels, Mitigation Measure BIO -3, BIO -4, and BIO -5 are provided below. They
require that the biologist coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to
implement avoidance measures during the bat maternity season in accordance with CDFW's established
standards. No construction will occur within a 300 -foot buffer of maternity roost sites during the bat
maternity season unless concurrence is received from CDFW to reduce that buffer distance based upon
the bat species present and the activities occurring. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -2
through BIO -5 impacts to roosting bats will be reduced to less than significant levels.
Development of the site while nesting birds are present would have a significant environmental impact.
The federal MBTA makes it unlawful to "take" any migratory bird including their nests, eggs, or products.
Migratory birds include geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds, and many others. As previously
stated, burrowing owl, ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, black -tailed gnatcatcher, and Le Conte's
thrasher could occur on the site, and are covered by the MBTA. Therefore, mitigation is required to
reduce the impact to nesting birds to less than significant levels. To that end, Mitigation Measure BIO -
6 is provided below. Vegetation removal activities should be conducted outside the general bird nesting
season (January 15 through August 31) to ensure compliance with California Fish and Game Code and to
avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. Any vegetation removal and/or construction activities that
occur during the nesting season will require that all suitable habitat be thoroughly surveyed for the
presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist before commencement of clearing. If any active nests
are detected a buffer of 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) around the nest adjacent to construction will be
delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. This mitigation measure would
assure impacts are reduced to less than significant levels.
As previously discussed, the associated offsite site improvements for electrical power to the site would
occur in an existing right-of-way and on a developed and a disturbed substation yard. These activities
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-18 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
will be subject to Mitigation Measure BIO -3 and BIO -6 if any vegetation is to be removed during nesting
season. After implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -6, the impact will be Tess than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-19 June 2021
LSA
N.T.S.
LEGEND
Study Area Suitable Roosting Habitat Locations
Rock Crevice/Cave Roost 0 Potential Tree Roost (Eucalyptus Snag)
a Potential Tree Roost (Palm Tree}
• P)tential TreSey R)6St (Pal) Verde}
O Potential Tree Roost (Snag}
The Wave at Cora! Mountain
Focused But_Surveys
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
LOCATIONS OF SUITABLE
ROOSTING HABITAT
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
H4.3-1
EXHIBIT
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
e/f. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such
as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, or conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan
The project site's native vegetation consists of desert saltbush scrub, tamarisk scrub, and mesquite
hummock. There is a stand of blue palo verde in the eastern portion of the project site. The removal of
this vegetation and trees as the result of the proposed project will not conflict with any local policy
relating to these species, because the City does not have a tree preservation policy or ordinance that
protects any of these species. The project lies within the boundary of the CVMSHCP which outlines
policies for conservation habitats and natural communities and is implemented by the City of La Quinta,
and establishes no policies applicable to the removal of these species of trees and habitat, except that
the project will be required to pay the CVMSHCP mitigation fee to mitigate the loss of habitat for covered
species in the Coachella Valley. There are no other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans
currently in place other than the CVMSHCP that are applicable to the proposed project. Therefore, the
project will have no impacts on local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, or with the
provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
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 development within the City, there is potential for adverse
cumulative effects to biological resources. Environmental protection laws and regulations have been
applied with increasing rigor since the early 1970s and include the California Endangered Species Act,
Federal Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act, as described in the Regulatory Setting earlier
in this EIR chapter. The City is also a permittee of the CVMSHCP.
The proposed project and other future projects within the City would be required to comply with local,
state, and federal laws and policies and all applicable permitting requirements of the regulatory and
oversight agencies intended to address potential impacts on biological resources. Regulations and
requirements enforced by the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be enforced by the City. The requirement established by these
agencies are designated to protect species, water bodies, and habitats from negative impacts associated
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-21 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
with development. Additionally, impacts from future projects in the area would be mitigated through
the payment of conservation fees implemented by the CVMSHCP. Implementation of the CVMSHCP will
result in the long-term preservation of habitat for covered species, which will assure their long-term
survival and substantially reduce cumulative impacts to sensitive biological resources in the Coachella
Valley.
Moreover, 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 Peninsular bighorn sheep. 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. Cumulative impacts are
expected to be less than significant.
4.3.3 Mitigation Measures
BIO -1: A burrowing owl clearance survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist not more than 30
days prior to any site disturbance (grubbing, grading, and construction). The pre -construction
survey is required to use accepted protocol (as determined CDFW). Prior to construction, a
qualified biologist will survey the construction area and an area up to 500 feet outside the project
limits for burrows that could be used by burrowing owls. If the burrow is determined to be
occupied, the burrow will be flagged, and a 160 -foot diameter buffer will be established during
non -breeding season or a 250 -foot diameter buffer during the breeding season. The buffer area
will be staked and flagged. No development activities 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 owls, and construction may
proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, owls shall be relocated pursuant to
accepted Wildlife Agency protocols. 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.
BI0-2: In June 2021, a qualified bat biologist will conduct a second round of focused nighttime surveys
for roosting bats at locations where suitable roosting habitat is identified. The nighttime survey
will include a combination of acoustic and exit count methods, and will take place during the bat
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-22 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
maternity season (March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley) to enable detection of maternity -
roosting bats. If maternity roosts are identified within the project area, the biologist will
coordinate with CDFW to implement avoidance measures during the bat maternity season in
accordance with CDFW's established standards. No construction activities will occur within a 300 -
foot buffer of maternity roost sites during the bat maternity season unless concurrence is
received from CDFW to reduce that buffer distance based upon the bat species present and the
activities occurring.
BIO -3: Removal of trees (including palm trees) shall occur outside the bat maternity season (March 15—
August 31 in the Coachella Valley), which coincides with the bird nesting season, to avoid the
potential for "take" of flightless young. Trees and snags that have been identified as confirmed
or potential roost sites require a two-step removal process and the involvement of a bat biologist
to ensure that no roosting bats are killed during this activity. Consistent with CDFW protocols this
two-step removal shall occur over two consecutive days as follows: on Day 1, branches and limbs
not containing cavities, as identified by a qualified bat biologist, will be removed. On Day 2, the
remainder of the tree may be removed without supervision by a bat biologist. The disturbance
caused by limb removal, followed by an interval of one evening, will allow bats to safely abandon
the roost.
BIO -4: Although no construction will occur at the rock outcrops where occupied bat roosts were
identified, bats roosting in that area could be subject to potential adverse effects from project -
related light overspill. To avoid permanent impacts to roosting bats (including maternity -roosting
bats) from the installation of new light fixtures associated with the proposed development, all
lighting fixtures shall have light shields or similar devices (e.g., dark sky compliant lighting)
installed to ensure that there will be no perceived light overspill onto Coral Mountain, which shall
be demonstrated by a supplemental light study approved by the project biologist and provided
to the City prior to issuance of any permit for occupancy or use of the Wave Basin.
BIO -5: A qualified bat biologist shall confirm the absence of roosting bats prior to any restoration work
or other disturbance of the adobe site. If bats are found or if the absence of bats cannot be
confirmed, the bat biologist will install or directly supervise installation of humane eviction
devices and exclusionary material to prevent bats from roosting in the building. Implementation
of the humane eviction/exclusions is typically performed in the fall (September or October)
preceding construction activity at each structure to avoid impacts to hibernating bats during the
winter months or during the maternity season (March 15—August 31 in the Coachella Valley),
when nonvolant (flightless) young are present. Any humane eviction/exclusion devices must be
installed at least 10 days prior to the demolition of a structure housing bats to allow sufficient
time for the bats to vacate the roost(s).
BIO -6: To ensure compliance with California Fish and Game Code and the MBTA and to avoid potential
impacts to nesting birds, vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the general
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-23 June 2021
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
bird nesting season (January 15 through August 31). Any vegetation removal and/or construction
activities that occur during the nesting season will require that all suitable habitats be thoroughly
surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist. Prior to commencement of
clearing, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys within 14 days and repeated
3 days prior to ground -disturbing activities. If any active nests are detected a buffer of 300 feet
(500 feet for raptors) around the nest adjacent to construction will be delineated, flagged, and
avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. The buffer may be modified and/or other
recommendations proposed as determined appropriate by the biologist to minimize impacts.
4.3,3 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1 through BIO -6 impacts to biological resources
are reduced to less than significant levels.
4.3,3 Resources
1. Biological Resources Assessment and CVMSHCP Consistency Analysis, LSA Associates, Inc., May
2021.
2. Focused Bat Survey Report, LSA Associates, Inc., May 2021.
3. Environmental protection Agency, May 2020 https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-
endangered-species-act, accessed 2020
4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 2020 https://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/hcp-
overview.html, accessed 2020.
5. La Quinta General Plan, Chapter III, Natural Resources Element, accessed 2020.
6. Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 2019 Annual Report, accessed 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.3-24 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.4 Cultural Resources
4.4 Cultural Resources
4,4.1 Introduction
Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report prepared by CRM Tech, Inc. (October 2019, Revised
May 2020), and the City of La Quinta General Plan Chapter 111 Natural Resources, Cultural Resources
Element. This section discusses the cultural resources that may be present in the project site or in the
vicinity and assesses impacts on these resources from the development associated with implementation
of the proposed project. The cultural resources report is included in the Appendices of this Draft EIR
(Appendix E, Cultural Report). Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in
this Draft EIR.
4.4.2 Existing Conditions
Current Natural Setting
The City of La Quinta is situated in the Coachella Valley, a northwest -southeast trending desert valley
that constitutes the western end of the Colorado Desert. Dictated by this geographic setting, the climate
and environment of the region are typical of southern California's desert country, marked by extremes
in temperature and aridity. Temperatures in the region reach over 120 degrees in summer and dip to
freezing in winter. Average annual precipitation is less than five inches, and the average annual
evaporation rate exceeds three feet.
The project area is located at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, in the City of La
Quinta, is adjacent to the eastern foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and includes a portion of a rocky
knoll known as Coral Mountains. The surrounding land uses feature primarily existing residential
development associated with golf courses and vacant land to the north and the east; single family homes
and vacant land to the south; and vacant land to the west. Much of the land within the project
boundaries has been farmed in the past, with the exception of the northeastern corner, the
southernmost portion, and the far western edge near Coral Mountain.
A partially collapsed adobe house is located near the center of the project area, along with concrete pads
and footings left by demolished residential and agricultural buildings. Several unpaved roads traverse
through the project site. A large stockpile of soil sits in the southernmost portion, apparently removed
from a retention basin located to the south of the property, across an earthen levee.
The terrain in most of the project area is relatively level due to past agricultural operations. The ground
surface in much of the project area has been disturbed to various degrees, except for the portion in and
around Coral Mountain. Historical sources consulted yielded no evidence of any settlement or
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-1 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
development activities within the project area prior to the 1910s. Between 1855 and 1903, the only man-
made feature known to exist in the project vicinity was a road from "Indian Wells to Torres", which was
part of the historic Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail, which ran roughly 1,000 feet to the east of the project
site. By the 1930s and early 40s, the segment of the Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail near the site had been
abandoned in favor of a regular grid of new roads, including today's Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The
Trail had disappeared from the landscape as result of agricultural development in the vicinity during the
early 20th century.
The project area had been developed by the early 1900's into an agricultural enterprise know in the
1950s as the Coral Reef Ranch. Past studies suggest that the ranch was established by Hartman P. Travis,
a Los Angeles physician, and his associate Lawton Clary. In 1941, at least four buildings were present on
the landholdings of the ranch, all clustered on the north edge of the project area. This includes the
partially collapsed adobe house, which is a remnant of the ranch complex.
On the Coral Reef Ranch, some of the building present in 1941 had been removed by the 1950s. In 1953-
1954, another residence was built on the eastern edge of the project area. Located on the east side of
the original alignment of Madison Street. However, this residence was demolished in 2004, during the
realignment of Madison Street. Onsite farming operations continued into the late 20th century before
finally being abandoned by the 1990s. Since then, the entire project area has stood undeveloped to the
present time.
Cultural Setting
Prehistoric Context
Numerous investigations on the history of cultural development in southern California have led
researchers to propose a number of cultural chronologies for the desert regions. A specific cultural
sequence for the Colorado Desert was offered by Schaefer (1994) on the basis of the many archaeological
studies conducted in the area. The earliest time period identified is the Paleoindian (ca. 8,000 to 12,000
years ago), when "small, mobile bands" relying primarily on a variety of small and large game animals as
well as wild plants for subsistence populated the region. These small groups settled "on mesas and
terraces overlooking larger washes". The artifact assemblage of that period typically consists of very
simple stone tools, "cleared circles, rock rings, [and] some geoglyph types".
The Early Archaic Period follows and dates to ca. 8,000 to 4,000 years ago. It appears that a decrease in
population density occurred at this time and that the indigenous groups of the area relied more on
foraging than hunting. Very few archaeological remains have been attributed to this time period. The
ensuing Late Archaic Period (ca. 4,000 to 1,500 years ago) is characterized by continued low population
densities and groups of "flexible" sizes that settled near available seasonal food resources and
supplemented vegetal foods with hunting of game animals. Groundstone artifacts for food processing
were prominent during this time period.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-2 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The most recent period in Schaefer's scheme, the Late Prehistoric, dates from ca. 1,500 years ago to the
time of the Spanish missions, and saw the continuation of the seasonal settlement pattern. Peoples of
the Late Prehistoric Period were associated with the Patayan cultural pattern and relied on the
availability of seasonal wild plants and animal resources. It was during this period that brown and buff
ware ceramics were introduced into the region.
The shores of Holocene Lake Cahuilla, during times of its presence, attracted much settlement and
resource procurement activities. In times of the lake's desiccation and absence, according to Schaefer,
the Native people moved away from its receding shores towards rivers, streams, and mountains.
Numerous archaeological sites dating to the last high stand of Holocene Lake Cahuilla, roughly between
900 and 1700 A.D., have been identified along its former shoreline. Testing and mitigative excavations
at these sites have recovered brown and buff ware ceramics, a variety of groundstone and projectile
point types, ornaments, and cremation remains.
Ethnohistoric Context
The Coachella Valley is a historical center of Native American settlement, where U.S. surveyors noted
large numbers of Indian villages and rancherias occupied by the Cahuilla people in the mid -19th century.
The origin of the name "Cahuilla" is unclear, but it may have originated from their own word kawiya,
meaning master or boss. The Takic-speaking Cahuilla are generally divided by anthropologists into three
groups, according to their geographic setting: the Pass Cahuilla of the San Gorgonio Pass -Palm Springs
area, the Mountain Cahuilla of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the Cahuilla Valley, and
the Desert Cahuilla of the eastern Coachella Valley. The basic written sources on Cahuilla culture and
history include Kroeber (1925), Strong (1929), and Bean (1978), based on information provided by such
Cahuilla members as Juan Siva, Francisco Patencio, Katherine Siva Saubel, and Mariano Saubel. The
following ethnohistoric discussion is derived primarily from these sources.
The Cahuilla did not have a single name that referred to an all-inclusive tribal affiliation. Instead,
membership was in terms of lineages or clans. Each lineage or clan belonged to one of two main divisions
of the people, known as moieties, which were named for the Wildcat, or Tuktum, and the Coyote, or
Istam. Members of clans in one moiety had to marry into clans from the other moiety. Individual clans
had villages, or central places, and territories they called their own for purposes of hunting game and
gathering raw materials for food, medicine, ritual, or tool use. They interacted with other clans through
trade, intermarriage, and ceremonies.
Cahuilla subsistence was defined by the surrounding landscape and primarily based on the hunting and
gathering of wild and cultivated foods, exploiting nearly all of the resources available in a highly
developed seasonal mobility system. They were adapted to the arid conditions of the desert floor, the
lacustral cycles of Holocene Lake Cahuilla, and the environments of the nearby mountains. When the
lake was full or nearly full, the Cahuilla would take advantage of the resources presented by the body of
fresh water, building elaborate stone fish traps. Once the lake had desiccated, they relied on the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-3 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
available terrestrial resources. Walk-in wells were dug by hand to utilize groundwater. The cooler
temperatures and resources available at higher elevations in the nearby mountains were also taken
advantage of.
The Cahuilla diet included seeds, roots, wild fruits and berries, acorns, wild onions, pinon nuts, and
mesquite and screw beans. Medicinal plants such as creosote, California sagebrush, yerba buena and
elderberry were typically cultivated near villages. Common game animals included deer, antelope, big
horn sheep, rabbits, wood rats and, when Holocene Lake Cahuilla was present, fish and waterfowl. The
Cahuilla hunted with throwing sticks, clubs, nets, traps, and snares, as well as bows and arrow. Common
tools included manos and metates, mortars and pestles, hammerstones, fire drills, awls, arrow -
straighteners, and stone knives and scrapers. These tools were made from locally sourced material as
well as materials procured through trade or travel. They also used wood, horn, and bone spoons and
stirrers; baskets for winnowing, leaching, grinding, transporting, parching, storing, and cooking; and
pottery vessels for carrying water, storage, cooking, and serving food and drink.
As the landscape defined their subsistence practices, the tending and cultivation practices of the Cahuilla
helped shape the landscape. Biological studies have recently found evidence that the fan palms found
in the Coachella Valley and throughout the southeastern California desert (Washingtonia filifera) may
not be relics of palms from a paleo-tropical environment, but instead a relatively recent addition brought
to the area and cultivated by native populations. Cahuilla oral tradition tells of a time before there were
palms in the area, and how the people, birds, and animals enjoyed the palm fruit once it had arrived.
The planting of palms by the Cahuilla is well-documented, as is their enhancement of palm stands
through the practice of controlled burning. Burning palm stands would increase fruit yield dramatically
by eliminating pests such as the palm borer beetle, date scales, and spider mites. Firing palm stands
prevented out -of -control wildfires by eliminating dead undergrowth before it accumulated to dangerous
levels. The Cahuilla also burned stands of chia to produce higher yields, and deergrass to yield straighter,
more abundant stalks for basketry.
Population data prior to European contact is almost impossible to obtain, but estimates range from 3,600
to as high as 10,000 persons covering a territory of over 2,400 square miles. During the 19th century,
the Cahuilla population was decimated as a result of European diseases, most notably smallpox, for
which the Native peoples had no immunity. Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage
are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian reservations in and near the Coachella Valley,
including Torres Martinez, Augustine, Cabazon, Agua Caliente, and Morongo. There has been a
resurgence of traditional ceremonies, and the language, songs, and stories are now being taught to the
younger generations.
Historic Context
In 1823-1825, Jose Romero, Jose Maria Estudillo, and Romualdo Pacheco became the first noted
European explorers to travel through the Coachella Valley when they led a series of expeditions in search
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-4 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
of a route to Yuma. Due to its harsh environment, few non -Indians ventured into the desert valley during
the Mexican and early American periods, except those who traveled along the established trails. The
most important of these trails was the Cocomaricopa Trail, an ancient Indian trading route that was
"discovered" in 1862 by William David Bradshaw and known after that as the Bradshaw Trail. In much of
the Coachella Valley, this historic wagon road traversed a similar course to that of present-day Highway
111. During the 1860s -1870s, the Bradshaw Trail served as the main thoroughfare between coastal
southern California and the Colorado River, until the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1876-
1877 brought an end to its heyday.
Non -Indian settlement in the Coachella Valley began in the 1870s with the establishment of railroad
stations along the Southern Pacific Railroad, and spread further in the 1880s after public land was
opened for claims under the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws. Farming
became the dominant economic activity in the valley thanks to the development of underground water
sources, often in the form of artesian wells. Around the turn of the century, the date palm was
introduced into the Coachella Valley, and by the late 1910s dates were the main agricultural crop and
the tree an iconic image celebrating the region as the "Arabia of America." Then, starting in the 1920s,
a new industry featuring equestrian camps, resorts, hotels, and eventually country clubs began to spread
throughout the Coachella Valley, transforming it into southern California's premier winter retreat.
In today's City of La Quinta, the earliest settlement and land development activities did not occur until
the turn of the century. In 1926, with the construction of the La Quinta Hotel, the development of La
Quinta took on the character of a winter resort, typical of the desert communities along Highway 111.
Beginning in the early 1930s, the subdivision of the La Quinta Cove area and the marketing of "weekend
homes" further emphasized this new direction of development. On May 1, 1982, La Quinta was
incorporated as the 19th city in Riverside County.
4.4,3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 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 (NRNP), 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 (ACNP).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-5 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
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 must 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. 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 NRNP 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-6 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
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 landmark 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
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.
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 PRC 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-7 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
• 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.
If a lead agency determines that an archaeological site is a historical resource, then the resource under
CEQA must be protected. If a project may cause a substantial adverse change to the resource and
avoidance is not feasible, the lead agency must identify potentially feasible measures to lessen the
impact to less than significant levels.
If an archaeological site does not meet the historical resource criteria contained in the State CEQA
Guidelines, and it is not deemed a unique archaeological resource in accordance with PRC § 21083.2 and
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, no further action would be required.
California Health and Safety Code
The California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001 is intended to provide a
seamless and consistent state policy to ensure that all California Indian human remains, and cultural
items be treated with dignity and respect. The intent of the legislature shall also do the following:
• Apply the state's repatriation policy consistently with the provisions of the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.), which was enacted in 1990.
• Facilitate the implementation of the provisions of the federal Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Act with respect to publicly funded agencies and museums in California.
• Encourage voluntary disclosure and return of remains and cultural items by an agency or
museum.
• Provide a mechanism whereby lineal descendants and culturally affiliated California Indian tribes
that file repatriation claims for human remains and cultural items under the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.) or under this chapter with
California state agencies and museums may request assistance from the commission in ensuring
that state agencies and museums are responding to those claims in a timely manner and in
facilitating the resolution of disputes regarding those claims.
• Provide a mechanism whereby California tribes that are not federally recognized may file claims
with agencies and museums for repatriation of human remains and cultural items.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-8 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Regional and Local
City of La Quinta Historic Preservation
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.
4.4.4 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
CRM Tech, Inc. ("CRM Tech") conducted a Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report ("Cultural
Report") which included a records search, historical background research, contacted Native American
representatives, and carried out an intensive -level field survey of the entire project area, in order to
identify cultural resources in the project area. The methods and results of the project's cultural resources
reports are provided below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-9 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Records Search
CRM Tech completed the records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), University of California,
Riverside, on July 11 and 15, 2019. During the records search, CRM Tech examined maps and records on
file at the EIC for previously identified cultural resources and existing cultural resources reports within a
one -mile radius of the project area. Previously identified cultural resources include properties
designated as California Historical Landmarks, Points of Historical Interest, or Riverside County
Landmarks, as well as those listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of
Historical Resources, or the California Historical Resources Inventory.
Historical Research
Historical background research for the Cultural Report was conducted by CRM Tech. Sources consulted
during the research included published literature in local and regional history, the U.S, General Land
Office (GLO) land survey plat maps dated 1856 and 1903, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic
maps dated 1904-1996, and aerial photographs taken in 1939-2018. The historic maps are collected at
the Science Library of the University of California, Riverside, and the California Desert District of the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), located in Moreno Valley. The aerial photographs are available from
the Engineering Department of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), the Nationwide
Environmental Title Research (NETR) Online website, and the Google Earth software.
Field Survey
From August 6 through 9, 2019, CRM Tech carried out the intensive -level field survey of the project area
with the assistance of Native American monitor Daniel Mirelez from the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla
Indians. The survey was completed on foot by walking a series of parallel transects oriented north -south
or east -west and spaced 15 -meters (approximately 50 feet) apart. In this way, the ground surface in the
entire project area was systematically and carefully examined for any evidence of human activities dating
to the prehistoric or historic period (i.e., 50 years ago or older). Ground visibility ranged from poor (5-10
percent) in areas of dense vegetation, such as in the northeast corner of the property, to excellent (90
percent) in most of the other areas.
Artifacts and features that were identified during the survey, including those previously recorded, were
marked with survey flags. Further inspection and recordation of the sites and isolates — i.e., localities
with fewer than three artifacts — was completed upon completion of the survey. A subsequent site visit
and further field recordation was carried out on October 8, 2019 by CRM Tech. The recordation
procedures included, at minimum, a description of the resource and its components, a location map,
and a sketch map for the sites. The field maps and descriptions were then compiled into standard site
record forms and submitted to the EIC for inclusion in the California Historical Resources Inventory.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-10 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Native American Participation
On July 2, 2019, CRM Tech submitted a written request to the State of California's Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission's Sacred Lands File. In the
meantime, CRM Tech notified the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians of the Upcoming
archaeological fieldwork and invited tribal participation. Following the NAHC's recommendations and
previously established consultation protocol, CRM Tech further contacted a total of 11 Native American
representatives in the region in writing on July 26, 2019, for additional information on potential Native
American cultural resources in the project vicinity.
Previous Studies in the Vicinity
According to EIC records, as many as 11 previous cultural resource studies have involved at least a
portion of the current project area, including four large-scale overview studies and seven area -specific
studies. Three of the overview studies were conducted for the City of La Quinta General Plan in 1991-
1992 and two updates to it in 2000 and 2010, and the other was a 2006 update to the citywide historic
resources survey. Each of these four studies covered the entire La Quinta city limits, well beyond the
current project boundaries.
Among the seven area -specific studies, four were Phase I surveys or archaeological monitoring programs
that only covered small portions of the project area along the eastern edge. The other three, completed
in 1979, 1987, and 1998, included all or most of the project area. However, these three studies are now
more than 20 years old and are considered out-of-date for statutory compliance purposes today, thus
necessitating the current study.
Within the one -mile scope of the records search, EIC records show nearly 60 additional studies on various
tracts of land and linear features, reflecting the rapid growth of the project vicinity over the past 40
years. Collectively, these studies covered more than 90% of the land within the scope of the records
search and resulted in the identification and recordation of 70 historical/archaeological sites and 49
isolates within the one -mile radius. Among these, eight of the sites and one of the isolates dated to the
historic period, representing mostly residential buildings and ranch/farm complexes but also including a
date palm garden, a well, and refuse items.
The vast majority of the previously recorded cultural resources, accounting for 62 sites and 48 isolates,
were of prehistoric—i.e., Native American—origin, which attests to the rich archaeological heritage of
the La Quinta area from the prehistoric era. The sites consisted mainly of ceramic and lithic scatters with
some bedrock milling features, groundstone artifacts, and the remnants of fire hearths. Some of the
larger concentrations of artifacts have been interpreted as habitation or fish camp sites, especially an
immense, 40 -acre habitation area recorded offsite. A few of the sites also yielded more significant or
distinctive findings, including human cremation remains, rock art panels, and unique artifacts such as
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-11 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
processed clay and a stone ball. A total of 43 prehistoric isolates consisted of pottery sherds, while three
manos, one Anadonta fragment and one Olivella bead fragment were also recorded.
Based on existing records, ten of the sites and six of the isolates were recorded within or partially within
the current project area, as listed below:
Site 33-000193
Site 33-001715
Site 33-001716
Site 33-001717
Site 33-005213
Site 33-005214
Site 33-008386
Site 33-008388
Site 33-009545
Site 33-011625
Isolate 33-009000
Isolate 33-009001
Isolate 33-009002
Isolate 33-009003
Isolate 33-009004
Isolate 33-009005
rock art panels
rock art panels with artifact scatter and historic -period graffiti
ceramic sherd scatter
ceramic sherds, flake, sun -colored amethyst glass
ceramic sherd scatter
ceramic sherd scatter
ceramic sherd scatter
historic -period farm complex with partially collapsed adobe house
rock art panels
abandoned single-family residence
two ceramic sherds
one ceramic sherd
one ceramic sherd
one ceramic sherd
one ceramic sherd
one ceramic sherd
As recorded previously, eight of sites and all of the isolates were entirely or primarily prehistoric in origin,
and the other two sites dated to the historic period. The recorded locations of these sites and isolates
were re -visited during the field survey, including the portions of the sites that ultimately proved to be
outside project boundaries, and the pertinent field observations are provided in the Cultural Report.
Project Impact
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as pursuant to section §15064.5?
Cultural 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,
the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Historical Resources Inventory or the City's
inventory.
Most of the project area had been developed by the 20th century into an agricultural business known in
the 1950s as the Coral Reef Ranch. At least four buildings were present on the landholdings of the ranch,
all clustered on the northern edge of the project area. In 1953-1954, another residence was built on the
eastern edge of the project area and located on the east side of the original alignment of Madison Street.
On the Coral Reef Ranch to the west, some of the buildings present in 1941 had been removed by the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-12 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
1950s but the farming operations continued well into the late 20th century before being abandoned in
the 1990s. Since that time, the entire project area has remained undeveloped.
The remains of the ranch complex, including the partially collapsed adobe house, have been recorded
into the California Historical Resources Inventory (Site 33-008388). First recorded in 1998, Site 33-
008388 represents the remains of buildings and other features of the former Coral Reef Ranch, with a
total of 6 locations and intermittent refuse scatter. The most notable feature is the partially collapsed
house near the center of the project area. Historical background research suggests that the house was
likely built during the 1920s or 1930s. Additional features of the ranch include a foundation and well or
cistern, a residential foundation, a pole barn foundation, and two structural foundations. A scatter of
artifacts was also found, including some that predate 1920.
This site was revisited during the current survey, and the adobe building was found to be vandalized,
burned, and further deteriorated. However, the walls are standing, and the adobe bricks are in overall
good condition. The rest of the site is still intact apart from the two structural foundations, where only
one of the two foundations remain. The residence foundation may be the remains of one of the earlier
structures at the site dating from the 1920s or before. The foundation may also include the original trash
pits or privies which could contain valuable artifacts revealing much about life in the harsh environment
at such an early date. A scatter of artifacts, also found in this area, has the greatest number of pre -1925
artifacts, mostly in the form of sun -colored glass, but also in brown and olive glass, porcelain, ceramics
and more. There may be remains of an early structure near this point, hidden amidst the broad stand of
tamarisk trees, an original windbreak. A search of these remains is required to ensure the most complete
recovery possible of the early 20th century artifacts and features. The site is a remnant of one of the
earliest settlements and agricultural enterprises to be established in the present-day boundary of the
City. The site remains eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources and has a local
level of significance. The site meets the definition of a historical resource and impacts to it would be
significant.
A comprehensive recordation program is recommended for Site 33-008388 to reduce impacts to a less
than significant level. To avoid impacts to this site, no earth moving activities shall occur until the site is
fenced and flagged; a comprehensive recordation project of the site has been completed; and
preservation and stabilization of the remains in place as a community feature with an informational
plaque has been completed, as described in Mitigation Measure CUL -1, provided below. The measure
also requires the preservation of the site in perpetuity by the Homeowners' Association for the project.
The implementation of this Mitigation Measure would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
The project is also required to make offsite site improvements for electrical power to the site. These
improvements would take place within IID's existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-of-
way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA West. Avenue 58 is a fully paved secondary arterial. The
IID substation yard has been heavily disturbed and impacted by development of other substation units,
vehicles, and maintenance materials. Given the previous grading and construction disturbance in the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-13 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
development of these areas and their current existing uses, no impacts to historical resources are
expected.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Archaeological resources are described as cultural resources, such as structures or objects that provide
evidence of past human activity. They are important for scientific, historic, and/or religious reasons to
cultures, communities, groups or individuals. The vast majority of the previously recorded cultural
resources within a one -mile radius of the project site, accounting for 62 sites and 48 isolates, were
prehistoric — i.e., Native American origin, which attests to the rich archaeological heritage of the City
from the prehistoric era. The sites mainly consisted of ceramic lithic scatters with some bedrock milling
features, ground stone artifacts, and the remnants of fire hearths. Some of the larger concentrations of
artifacts have been interpreted as habitation or fish camp sites. A few of the sites also include rock art
panels and human cremation remains (subsequent removal of the remains is discussed in item C. of this
section).
A total of eight sites and seven isolates are known to be present within or partially within the project
boundary today. Only three sites constitute an archaeological and historical resource. Three of the sites
contain panels of rock art as well as milling features and ceramics contributory to the rock art panel areas
(33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545). These sites are situated in proximity to one another along the
eastern base of Coral Mountain and have been termed the "Coral Mountain Rock Art Complex".
According to a previous study of the project area (conducted in 2003 and referenced in CRM Tech's
Cultural Report), the images from the Rock Art Complex likely represent a style of rock art that was
produced within a very narrow span of time. Further research and analysis of these sites provides a
unique opportunity to study ethnic petroglyphs, and is required to collect and document:
(1) the distribution and design element inventory of petroglyphs, a recognized sensitive resource to
contemporary Native Americans;
(2) designs that may be unique in themselves and represent a style and time period not yet fully
recognized and described;
(3) data about milling features unique to the Coachella Valley that reflect part of the subsistence patterns
of the valley post Lake Cahuilla;
(4) data on the ceramic manufacturing and distribution of local vs. exotic wares through further analysis.
The 2003 evaluation found that the Complex was eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places under criterion "c" and "d." The current technical analysis determined that the sites are also
eligible for listing in the California Register. As a result, impacts to these sites resulting from development
of the project would be considered significant and must be mitigated. To that end, Mitigation Measure
CUL -5 has been provided below. This mitigation measure assures fencing and delineation of the area
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-14 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
prior to any development activity; the long-term protection of these sites, through prohibition of
development, and the recordation of protective easements, as well as a program of research and
documentation of the sites. For the balance of Site 33-001715, where scattered artifacts but no features
were found, mitigative surface collection and subsurface excavation is required in Mitigation Measure
CUL -5 to recover a representative sample of the cultural materials prior to the commencement of the
project. In addition, CUL -2 and CUL -3 require monitoring on the site for all earth moving activities
(including vegetation removal, grubbing, grading and excavation) by both an archaeological and Tribal
monitor. These monitoring activities will provide further protection of these resources. In addition,
during Tribal consultation, the ACBCI requested further mitigation, which is provided in Section 4.13,
Tribal Cultural Resources. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to sites 33-
00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545 will be reduced to less than significant levels.
The other sites were previously determined not to be eligible for listing in the California Register due to
the low number of artifacts and the minimal archaeological data potential. Therefore, none of these four
sites appears eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, and none of them
qualifies as a "historical resource."
The isolates located within the project area consist of either prehistoric ceramic sherds or glass
fragments from the historic period, with no associated archaeological features or other artifacts. Isolates
like these do not qualify as archaeological sites due to the lack of contextual integrity. However, given
the rich archaeological discoveries in and near the project area, the possibility of encountering buried
prehistoric cultural remains is likely. This would represent a significant impact if not mitigated. Therefore,
consistent with the archaeologist's recommendations, Mitigation Measures CUL -2 and CUL -3 provide
that archaeological monitoring shall be implemented during all ground disturbing activities. To further
protect resources that may be uncovered during project development, CUL -4 is provided, which requires
that all construction workers receive sensitivity training during all aspects and phases of project
construction. Together, these mitigation measures will assure that impacts to cultural resources
unearthed during all phases of project construction will be reduced to less than significant levels.
In addition to the findings of the archaeologist, the City conducted Tribal consultation in conformance
with SB 18 and AB 52. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians requested consultation, and informed
the City that this area is of high sensitivity to the Cahuilla people. A number of mitigation measures were
recommended by the Tribe, and are included in Section 4.14, Tribal Cultural Resources.
Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL -2, CUL -3, CUL -4, and CUL -5 and the
Mitigation Measures listed in Section 4.14, Tribal Cultural Resources, impacts to archaeological
resources will be less than significant.
c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-15 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Coral Mountain Rock Art Complex originally recorded in 1973, was interpreted as "an old family or
clan area", where house rings, fire pits, remains of a hand -dug well, and a cremation area were also
reported, along with a small scatter of pottery and lithic artifacts. The two cremations observed in 1973
were apparently removed for reburial prior to 1980. Site 33-001717 was described as a small sherd
scatter with a possible cremation. When it was revisited in 1987, no evidence of a cremation was found,
and three sherds were collected at that time. The site was again visited in 1998, at which time a total of
23 ceramic sherds, a quartz flake, and a piece of purple glass were recorded. The one piece of sun -
colored amethyst glass dated from the early 20th century, giving the site a minor historic component.
During the current survey, site 33-001717 was revisited, and the only cultural remains observed within
site boundaries were three ceramic sherds located northwest of a dirt road. As described above, the
project occurs in a highly sensitive area, and ground disturbing activities could result in the identification
of additional resources, including cremations.
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 location 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 County Coroner has examined the remains.
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. Compliance with the California Health and Safety Code will ensure that proper actions shall be
taken in the event of a discovery or recognition of any human remains during project construction
activities. In addition, CUL -2 and CUL -3, which require on-site monitoring, will assure that ground
disturbing activities are observed by experts who can recognize such resources if unearthed. Therefore,
with compliance with State law and the implementation of CUL -2 and CUL -3, the impact to human
remains will be less than significant.
4.4.5 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts relating to cultural resources are regional in nature, due to the wide range of Native
peoples in the Coachella Valley. Build out of the General Plan area, including lands of the proposed
project, has the potential to cumulatively impact cultural resources, as further analyzed in the General
Plan EIR (SCH#2010111094). Development within the project site, however, does not have the potential
to significantly impact cultural resources because Mitigation Measures CUL -1 through CUL -5 will ensure
that the proposed project would preserve sensitive resources on site, monitor and mitigate 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, 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-16 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
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.
4.4.6 Mitigation Measures
CUL -1: A comprehensive recordation program shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist for Site 33-
008388. The program shall contain detailed drawings and measurements to preserve the
information on the adobe building. Such information would include the floor plan, elevations,
building materials and their configurations, and any other notable structural and architectural
details. The adobe remains and an appropriate buffer determined by the project archaeologist
shall be flagged and cornered off during all ground disturbance and preserved in place. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure in Planning Area II, the adobe will be fenced off and an
informational plaque describing the history of the ranch complex shall be provided, and the
project proponent shall provide the City with the CC&Rs for the project area, demonstrating that
the feature would be maintained in perpetuity by the project's Homeowners
Association. Special attention should be given to the residence foundation, which, may be the
remains of one of the earlier structures at the site, dating from 1920s or before. The footings
and slabs at this location should be cleared and measured, and attempts should be made to
locate the original trash pits or privies which could contain valuable artifacts revealing much
about life in the harsh environment at such an early date. The scatter of artifacts has the greatest
number of pre -1925 artifacts, mostly in the form of sun -colored glass, but also in brown and
olive glass, porcelain, ceramics and more. There may be remains of an early structure near this
point, hidden amidst the broad stand of tamarisk trees, an original windbreak. Search of these
remains is required to ensure the most complete recovery possible of the early 20th century
artifacts and features. Photos, measurements, and artifacts shall be catalogued, analyzed,
reported, and curated at the Coachella Valley Museum (Love et aI.1998:54).
CUL -2: The presence of a qualified archaeologist shall be required during all project related ground
disturbing activities, including clearing and grubbing. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and
approved by the ACBCI and the City prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activity for
all construction phases and activities. If potentially significant archaeological materials are
discovered, all work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until the
archaeologist can assess the significance of the find.
CUL -3: An approved Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) Native American Cultural Resource
Monitor shall be present during any ground disturbing activities (including archaeological testing
and surveys) for the project. If potentially significant archaeological materials are discovered, all
work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until the Tribal monitor can
assess the significance of the find.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-17 June 2021
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL -4: Prior to ground disturbance during any phase of the project, cultural sensitivity training shall
take place for all workers, conducted by the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office
(THPO).
CUL -5: Sites 33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545, along the base of Coral Mountain and at the toe of
the slope, which contains the rock art panels and bedrock milling features, shall be avoided and
protected in situ during project construction through the establishment of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas. Deed restrictions shall be recorded for the Environmentally Sensitive Areas and
provided to the City prior to any ground disturbance of any portion of Planning Area III. For the
balance of Site 33-001715, where scattered artifacts but no features were found, mitigative
surface collection and subsurface excavation shall be completed prior to ground disturbance to
recover a representative sample of the cultural materials prior to the commencement of the
project and as a condition of grading permit issuance. The excavation shall include a
combination of standard archaeological units, shovel test pits, and backhoe trenches to optimize
both efficient coverage of the site area and safe recovery of cultural remains. The survey
protocols shall be approved by ACBCI and their approval provided to the City in writing prior to
the initiation of any ground disturbing activity on the site.
4.4.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL -1 through CUL -5 impacts to cultural resources are
reduced to less than significant.
4.4.8 Resources
1. City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter III Natural Resources Element.
2. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech,
October 2019, revised May 2021.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.4-18 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.5 Energy Resources
4.5 Energy Resources
4.5.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing energy resources setting and potential impacts from implementation
of the proposed project. Information for this section was obtained from the Coral Mountain Specific Plan
Greenhouse Gas Analysis, November 2020 (Appendix 1). Calculations within the project's Greenhouse
Gas Analysis were provided by CaIEEMod Version 2016.3.2 (also included in Appendix 1). 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. Sources
used in the preparation are included in Chapter 8.0, References, at the end of this Draft EIR.
Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emission, Section 4.13, Transportation, and
Section 4.15, 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).
4.5.2 Existing Conditions
The proposed project currently lies within a 929 -acre governed by the Andalusia at Coral Mountain
Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is located south of Avenue 58, east and west of Madison Street, and north
of Avenue 60. As a part of the project, the applicant is requesting approval of a Specific Plan Amendment
to remove the area west of Madison Street. The 386 -acre project area west of Madison Street proposes
a new Specific Plan, identified as the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan. The new Specific Plan proposes
a mixed-use development consisting of Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, Neighborhood
Commercial, and Open Space Recreational land uses. Low Density Residential land uses will occupy
approximately 232.3 acres and result in a maximum of 496 dwelling units. Tourist Commercial land uses
will result in a 16 -acre wave basin, 104 dwelling units, 150 hotel rooms, and 57,000 square feet of private
resort -serving commercial uses available to residents and hotel guests, on approximately 120.8 acres.
General Commercial land uses will occupy approximately 7.7 acres with up to 60,000 square feet of retail
commercial uses available to the general public. Open Space Recreation land uses will occur on
approximately 23.6 acres in the southwest portion of the site.
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 (The Gas
Company or SoCalGas). Electricity and natural gas are the primary sources of energy in the City of La
Quinta.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-1 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code sets efficiency standards for new construction, regulating
energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilations, water heating, and lighting. These building efficiency
standards are enforced through the City's building permit process. The site is currently vacant.
Electricity
State
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
279,401.9 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity in the most recent available year, 2019. Electricity demand
in California is projected to rise to approximately 354,209 GWh (high energy demand) in 2030.
Electricity usage in California for different land uses varies substantially by the type(s) of uses in a
building, type(s) of construction materials used in a building, and the efficiency of all electricity
consuming devices within a building. Due to the State's energy efficiency standards and efficiency and
conservation programs, California's per capita electricity use had remained stable for more than 30
years, while the national average has steadily increased. 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
Imperial Irrigation District
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 3,462.8 GWh were consumed in IID's service area in 2019. IID provides
residents and businesses in its service area with various assistance and renewable energy programs,
discussed below.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-2 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY 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,
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 4th
quarter, and up to $125 during the 2nd and 3rd 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-3 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
City of La Quinta General Plan
According to the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR), buildout of
residential and commercial uses in the General Plan 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.
The City has committed to reducing its consumption of electricity through a number of programs listed
in the General Plan.
Project Electricity
Electric utilities for the site will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District (IID). The project will be
required to install an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600 Avenue 58
as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the
existing right-of-way (see Exhibit 3-13, Off -Site Electrical Improvements).
Natural Gas
State
Natural gas sources of the State of California (State) include in -State sources (16 percent), Canada (28
percent), the Rockies (10 percent), and the southwest (46 percent). Gas from outside sources enter the
State through large, high pressure gas lines. These transmission lines feed natural gas storage areas
located in Orange and northern Los Angeles counties, which serve all of Southern California.
Natural gas is the primary source of energy used in the City for space heating, domestic and commercial
hot water, cooking and heating spaces. The Southern California Gas Company ("SoCalGas" "The Gas
Company") has regional and local distribution lines in the City of La Quinta.
According to the CEC, one third of energy consumed in California is natural gas. Nearly 45 percent of the
natural gas burned in California is used for electricity generation, and much of the remainder is
consumed in residential (21 percent), industrial (25 percent), and commercial (9 percent) developments.
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.
Regional and Local
Southern California Gas Company
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-4 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
SoCalGas transports natural gas to the Coachella Valley through regional high-pressure lines. Limiting
stations transfer the gas to supply lines with reduced pressure, which feed local accounts. Natural gas is
the primary energy source for water heaters, cooking and heating.
La Quinta General Plan
According to the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report, at City build -out, residential units
will use approximately 919,426,079 cubic feet 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.
SoCalGas has developed a wide range of energy management, conservation, and equipment retrofit
programs for its consumer base. Assistance in facilities planning and analysis is also provided by SoCalGas
to maximize energy efficiency and cost-effective equipment purchases and operations.
Project Natural Gas
Currently, natural gas is not provided to the site. 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 adjacent to the project site along Avenue 58 and Madison
Street, north and east of the project, respectively. The existing underground natural gas lines are located
at the northern side of Avenue 58 and consists of a 4 -inch line.
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, east of the project site, and terminate at the southwestern corner of the Andalusia property.
Petroleum
State
There are more than 27 million registered vehicles in California, and those vehicles consumed an
estimated 18.5 billion gallons of petroleum and diesel in 2014, according to the CEC. Gasoline and other
vehicle fuels are commercially provided commodities and would be available to the project via
commercial outlets.
According to CEC, transportation accounts for nearly 37 percent of California's total energy consumption.
Petroleum-based fuels account for approximately 92 percent of California's transportation energy
sources. Technological advances, market trends, consumer behavior, and government policies could
result in significant changes to fuel consumption by type and in total. Various policies, rules, and
regulations have been enacted to improve vehicle fuel efficiency, promote the development and use of
alternative fuels, reduce transportation -source air pollutants and GHG emissions, and reduce vehicle
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-5 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
miles traveled (VMT), at the federal and State levels. Technological advances have made use of other
energy resources or alternative transportation modes increasingly feasible, as market forces have driven
the price of petroleum products steadily upward.
Regional and Local
Project Petroleum
The project proposes a variety of mixed uses which includes up to 496 low density housing dwelling
units, a resort with 150 rooms, 104 resort residential dwelling units, 57,000 square feet of resort
commercial buildings, an artificial surf Wave basin, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial
uses, and open space recreation uses. It is anticipated that the project will have approximately 1,698
residents, 674 employees, and 300 hotel occupants at buildout of the project. This amounts to a service
population (SP) of 2,672, according to the Coral Mountain Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis,
provided by Urban Crossroads. With the anticipated service population of 2,672, the vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) for the project is expected to be 19,415,728 VMT annually.
Paved public roadways delineate the project's northern and eastern boundaries. Avenue 58 delineates
the project's northern boundary, and Madison Street delineates the property's eastern boundary.
The project's internal circulation system will consist of a series of roads providing access to the individual
residential and recreational components within the Specific Plan area. The proposed internal rights of
way will vary from 32-foot/33-foot private drives to the 100 -foot entry drive.
4.5.3 Regulatory Setting
International
In November 2014, in a historic joint announcement with China, U.S. President Barack Obama laid out
an ambitious but achievable target to reduce GHG emissions in the U.S. in the range of 26 to 28 percent
below 2005 levels by 2025, while China announced its intent to peak carbon emissions around 2030 and
to double its share of zero -carbon energy to 20 percent. The announcement was a historic step for
climate change action and for the US -China relationship, as the world's two largest economies, energy
consumers, and carbon emitters came together to demonstrate leadership on an issue that affects the
entire world.
2015 United Nations Paris Climate Change Conference
On December 12, 2015, 195 nations, including the U.S. and China, agreed upon a strategy for combatting
global climate change to be in effect in 2020. This historic meeting, known as the 21st annual Conference
of the Parties (COP21), focused on five key elements: mitigation, a transparency system and global stock -
take, adaptation, loss and damage, and support. In mitigating global climate change, COP 21 participating
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-6 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
nations agreed upon a universal long-term goal of keeping the global temperature rise below 2° C above
pre -industrial levels. The agreement also encouraged participating nations to limit temperature
increases even further to 1.5° C or 2.7° F above pre -industrial levels. In addition to that, nations agreed
to peak their GHG emissions as soon as possible, with the recognition that developing countries may
take longer than developed countries. Thereafter, nations are to undergo rapid reductions in accordance
to best available technological advances. The nations are to submit national climate action plans that
detail future objectives to address climate change.
On October 5, 2016, the threshold for entry into force of the Paris Agreement was achieved. The Paris
Agreement entered into force on November 4, 2016. The United States withdrew from the Paris
Agreement on June 1, 2017. The United States rejoined the Agreement in early 2020.
Federal
Clean Power Plan
In June 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the Clean Power Plan (CPP), the first-
ever carbon pollution standards for existing power plants that will protect children's health and put the
US on the path toward a 30 percent reduction in carbon pollution from the power sector by 2030. Power
plants are the largest single source of carbon pollution, accounting for about one-third of all domestic
greenhouse gas emissions. The CPP will set standards for carbon pollution from power plants, just as the
US has set limits on power plant emissions of arsenic, mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and soot.
Climate Action Plan
On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced the Climate Action Plan (CAP), a national plan for tackling
climate change. The CAP is divided into three sections and outlines the steps to cut carbon pollution in
the United States, including standards for both new and existing power plants, action to prepare the U.S.
for the impacts of climate change, and plans to lead international efforts to address global climate
change.
Federal Regulation and the Clean Air Act
On December 7, 2009, the EPA issued an Endangerment Finding under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air
Act, opening the door to federal regulation of GHGs. The Endangerment Finding noted that GHGs
threaten public health and welfare and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. To date, the
EPA has not promulgated regulations on GHG emissions, but it has begun to develop them.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-7 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) jointly administer the CAFE standards. The U.S. Congress has specified that CAFE standards must
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 for the nation to
conserve energy.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is an independent agency that regulates the
transmission and sale of electricity, natural gas, and oil in interstate commerce, licensing of hydroelectric
projects, and oversight of related environmental matters. The setting and enforcing of interstate
transmission sales is also regulated by FERC.
Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act
In 1975, Congress enacted the Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act to serve the nation's energy
demands and promote feasibly attainable conservation methods. This act established the first fuel
economy standards for on -road motor vehicles in the United States. Pursuant to the act, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards. In
2012, new fuel economy standards were approved for model year 2017 passenger cars and light trucks
at 54.5 miles per gallon. Fuel economy is determined based on each manufacturer's average fuel
economy for the fleet of vehicles available for sale in the United States.
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Acts of 1991 (ISTEA) promoted the development of
intermodal transportation systems to maximize mobility, as well as address national and local interests
in air quality and energy. ISTEA contained factors that metropolitan planning organizations were to
address in development transportation plans and programs, including some energy-related factors. To
meet the new ISTEA requirements, metropolitan planning organizations adopted explicit policies
defining the social, economic, energy, and environmental values guiding transportation decisions.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 215t Century
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA -21) was signed into law in 1998 and builds on
the initiatives established in the ISTEA legislation, discussed above. TEA -21 authorizes highway, highway
safety, transit, and other efficient surface transportation programs. TEA -21 continues the program
structure established for highways and transit under ISTEA, such as flexibility in the use of funds,
emphasis on measures to improve the environment, and focus on a strong planning process as the
foundation of informed transportation decisions. TEA -21 also provides for investment in research and
its application to maximize the performance of the transportation system through, for example,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-8 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems, to help improve operations and management of
transportation systems and vehicle safety.
Energy Policy Act of 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 addresses energy production in the United States, including (1) energy
efficiency; (2) renewable energy; (3) oil and gas; (4) coal; (5) tribal energy; (6) nuclear matters and
security; (7) vehicles and motor fuels, including ethanol; (8) hydrogen; (9) electricity; (10) energy tax
incentives; (11) hydropower and geothermal energy; and (12) climate change technology. The act
includes provisions such as increasing the amount of biofuel that must be mixed with gasoline sold in
the United States and loan guarantees for entities that develop or use innovative technologies that avoid
the by -production of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
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:
• Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) (Section 202)
• Appliance and Lighting Efficiency Standard (Sections 301-325)
• Building Energy Efficiency (Sections 411-441)
This federal legislation requires ever-increasing levels of renewable fuels to replace petroleum. The
USEPA is responsible for developing and implementing regulations to ensure that transportation fuel
sold in the United States contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel. The RFS program regulations
were developed in collaboration with refiners, renewable fuel producers, and many other stakeholders.
The RFS program was created under the Environmental Policy Act of 2005 and established the first
renewable fuel volume mandate in the United States. As required under the Act, the original RFS
program (RFS1) required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be blended into gasoline by 2012. Under
the EISA, and RFS program was expanded in several key ways that lay the foundation for achieving the
significant reduction of GHG emissions from the use of renewable fuels, for reducing imported
petroleum, and encouraging the development and expansion of the nation's renewable fuel sector. The
updated program is referred to as RFS2 and includes the following:
• Expanded RFS program to include diesel, in addition to gasoline.
• Increased volume of renewable fuel required to by blended into transportation fuel from nine
billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion by 2022.
• New categories of renewable fuel and separate volume requirements for each one.
• Requirement that the USEPA apply lifecycle GHG performance threshold standards to ensure that
each category of renewable fuel emits fewer GHGs than the petroleum fuel it replaces.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-9 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Additional provisions of the EISA address energy savings in government and public institutions,
promoting research for alternative energy, additional research in carbon capture, international energy
programs, and the creation of "green" jobs.
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is committed to transforming the way buildings are designed,
constructed, and operated through the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
certification program. LEED acts as a certification program for buildings and communities to guide their
design, construction, operations and maintenance toward sustainability. LEED is based on prerequisites
and credits that a project meets in order to achieve a certification level of Certified, Silver, Gold, or
Platinum.
State
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.
California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings
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. The standards are updated
periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and
methods. In December 2018, the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2019 Building and
Energy Efficiency Standards with the effective date beginning January 1, 2020. This code requires new
homes to include at least 50 percent of kitchen lighting to be LED, compact fluorescent or similar high
efficiency fixtures, double pane windows, cool roofs, and other design techniques to reduce heat loss.
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. The 2019 CALGreen standards became effective on January
1, 2020. Part 11 establishes design and development methods that include environmentally responsible
site selection, building design, building siting and development to protect, restore and enhance the
environmental quality of the site and respect the integrity of adjacent properties.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-10 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Energy Action Plan 11
The California Energy Commission (CEC), California Power Authority, and California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) adopted an Energy Action Plan (EAP) to establish goals for California's energy future
and a means to achieve these goals. EAP II supports and expands on the commitment of State agencies
to cooperate and reflect on the energy actions since original EAP adoption. EAP II includes a coordinated
implementation plan for state energy policies that have been articulated through Executive Orders,
instructions to agencies, public positions, and appointees' statements; CEC's integrated Energy Policy
Report; CPUC and CEC processes; agencies' policy forums; and legislative direction.
Integrated Energy Policy Report
The CEC is responsible for preparing Integrated Energy Policy Reports, which identify emerging trends
related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a
healthy economy. The CEC's 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report covers a broad range of topics,
including decarbonizing buildings, integrating renewables, energy efficiency, energy equity, integrating
renewable energy, and the California Energy Demand Forecast, in an effort to leverage California's clean
electricity system to decarbonize, or remove carbon from other portions of the state's energy system.
The Integrated Energy Policy Report discusses the State's policy goal of becoming 100 percent zero -
carbon by 2045.
Renewable Portfolio Standards
As most recently amended by SB 350, the Renewable Portfolio Standard requires an annual increase in
renewable energy generation by utility providers equivalent to at least 33 percent by 2020 and 50
percent by 2050 (Interim Renewable Portfolio Standards targets are also set between 2020 and 2030).
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. CARB has also adopted regulations
that enhance the operating efficiencies of various types of construction equipment. While such
regulations primarily are adopted to reduce air pollution, co -benefits in the form of reduced petroleum
consumption are common.
Sustainable Communities Strategy
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, or Senate Bill 375, coordinates land
use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet its GHG
emissions reduction mandates. As specifically codified in Government Code Section 65080, SB 375
requires the Metropolitan Planning Organization relevant to the project area (in this case, the Southern
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-11 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
California Association of Governments) to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in its
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). While the main focus of the SCS is to plan for growth that will
ultimately reduce GHG emission, the strategy is also a part of a bigger effort to address many other
development issues within the general vicinity, including transit and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
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. This
reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that will be
phased in starting in 2012. 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
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.
Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) directs CARB to set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The
law establishes a "bottom-up" approach to ensure that cities and counties are involved in the
development of regional plans to achieve those targets. SB 375 builds on the existing framework of
regional planning to tie together the regional allocation of housing needs and regional transportation
planning in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicle trips.
SB 375 sets up a collaborative process between metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and the Air
Resources Board to establish GHG emissions targets for each region in the state. SB 375 requires each
MPO to include a "Sustainable Communities Strategy" (SCS) in the regional transportation plan that
demonstrates how the region will meet the GHG emission targets. The Senate Bill requires that decisions
relating to the allocation of transportation funding be consistent with the SCS. SB 375 also creates CEQA
streamlining incentives for projects that are consistent with the regional SCS.
Regional and Local
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-12 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
In 2012, as part of the City's General Plan Update, a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan was prepared. The
Plan was prepared based on input from utility providers and drew from a variety of technical studies,
reports, and records to conduct a community wide and government specific greenhouse gas inventory.
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 CO2e emissions 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.
State-wide regulations, including previously mentioned AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05, act as policy
guides for the City of La Quinta to reduce the City's energy demand. The La Quinta GHG Reduction Plan,
published in 2012, was established in compliance with AB 32 and EO S-3-05, in order to reduce the
amount of GHG emissions produced in the City. According to the GHG Reduction Plan, new development
is required to adhere to the latest building code standards, which assure energy efficiency and
incorporate 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 recognizes that fuel efficiency
standards, land use efficiencies, and reducing overall VMTs will result in the reduction of GHGs. The City
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 from non-resident and multi -family development, and (2) considering
access routes for pedestrians and bicycles.
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:
• 8.14.010, Adoption of the California Energy Code requires that new development implement
energy efficiency building practices.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-13 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
• 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, the conservation of
energy resources is vital in the lifestyle of City residents. Since the production of electricity and natural
gases requires the burning of fossil fuels, the increased demand for electricity in the City also increases
air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions created in the City. Therefore, reducing energy consumption
will contribute to reducing the amount of air pollutants and greenhouse gases generated by the
production of electricity and natural gas.
Implemented through the GHG Reduction Plan, the 2035 LQGP also strives to reduce energy
consumption in the City by requiring energy efficient and building design measures. 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 GP. The
overall goal is to reduce energy consumption in the City to improve air quality, and reduce GHG
emissions, in order to increase the quality of life for the City's residents.
Alternative Energy
The City and the Sphere of Influence (SOI) do not have sustained winds sufficient to accommodate
commercial wind energy development, but they have, and will continue, to benefit from this resource.
Geothermal energy is in production in Imperial County and is currently part of the IID energy profile. Its
expansion is also likely during the life of the General Plan.
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 General Plan, it can be expected that solar energy use for residences and businesses will increase
substantially.
Petroleum
According to the Livable Community chapter of the La Quinta General Plan, 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 Greenhouse Gas 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-14 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
- 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.
Alternative transportation programs extend beyond bus service expansion. Transportation Demand
Management requires large employers to provide incentives and facilities to reduce the number of
employee vehicle trips they create.
4.5.4 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?
Methodology
The analysis in this section is derived from 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, provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. CaIEEMod is a Statewide land use emissions
computer model designed to provide a uniform platform to quantify potential criteria pollutant and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from land use
projects. Fuel consumption by construction equipment was calculated based on the equipment mix and
usage factors provided in the CaIEEMod construction output files. Fuel consumption from construction
worker and vendor trucks was calculated using the trip rates and distances provided in the CaIEEMod
construction output files. Total VMT were then calculated for each type of construction -related trip and
divided by the corresponding miles per gallon factor using the USEPA's Greenhouse Gas Equivalency
Calculator.
Annual Consumption of electricity and natural gas was calculated using demand factors provided in
CAIEEMod as part of the GHG Analysis included as Appendix! and discussed in Section 4.7, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions, of this Draft EIR. Daily Trip Generation and vehicle miles traveled used in the analysis
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-15 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
were also based on the inputs from the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, also
provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix L.1). Based on the VMT, gasoline and diesel consumption
rates were calculated for project operation.
Per the GHG Analysis, the physical construction of the project is anticipated to be constructed in phases,
defined as:
• Phase 1 (2021) including resort (wave basin, hotel uses, and 57,000 square feet of commercial
ancillary uses), 104 attached dwelling units, 26 detached dwelling units, and 10,000 square feet
of retail.
• Project Phase 2 (2023) adds 25,000 square feet of retail.
• Project Phase 3 (2026) adds 470 detached dwelling units and 25,000 square feet of retail.
In addition to physical construction of the project, the project is also required to make off-site
improvements to provide electrical power to the site. These improvements would take place within IID's
existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-of-way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA
West.
Project -related construction of the site is categorized in the GHG Analysis to occur in the following order:
Site Preparation; Grading; Building Construction; Paving; and Architectural Coating. Per the GHG
Analysis, the construction schedule set forth in Table 4.5-1 and utilized in the analysis represents a
"worst-case" analysis scenario because it analyzes the most condensed realistic schedule. Should
construction occur over any longer period of time, reduced overall emissions would be expected because
emissions regulations are expected to become more stringent over time. The duration of construction
activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction
fleet as required by CEQA Guidelines. The construction timeline used to calculate the CaIEEMod outputs
for each developmental phase of the project is outlined in Table 4.5-1, Coral Mountain Resort
Construction Duration.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-16 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Table 4.5-1 Coral Mountain Resort Construction Duration
Phase
Start Date
End Date
Days
Phase 1 (2021)
Site Preparation
07/01/2020
08/25/2020
40
Grading
08/26/2020
01/26/2021
110
Building Construction
01/27/2021
11/02/2021
200
Paving
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Architectural Coating
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Phase 2 (2023)
Site Preparation
09/19/2022
09/19/2022
1
Grading
09/20/2022
09/21/2022
2
Building Construction
09/22/2022
02/08/2023
100
Paving
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Architectural Coating
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Phase 3 (2026)
Site Preparation
07/09/2023
03/15/2024
180
Grading
03/16/2023
12/20/2024
200
Building Construction
12/21/2024
11/20/2026
500
Paving
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
Architectural Coating
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
Source: Table 3-1: Construction Duration, Coral Mountain Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas
Analysis, Urban Crossroads, November 2020.
In order to determine the project's impacts on energy demand, Urban Crossroads ran multiple CaIEEMod
models which included:
• Annual Construction Emissions
• Special Events Operational
• Proposed Project Operational
The Special Events Operational model includes up to 2,500 guests per day, up to four events per year
(up to four days per event). The Proposed Project Operational model includes the operation of the
project at total project buildout. Project -related energy consumption, via electricity, natural gas, and
petroleum, is analyzed below in the discussion of project impacts.
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 2019 version
of Title 24 became effective on January 1, 2020. The CEC anticipates that residential buildings will use
approximately 53 percent less energy and nonresidential buildings will use approximately 30 percent
less. The CaIEEMod defaults for Title 24 — Electricity, Title 24 — Natural Gas, and Lighting Energy were
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-17 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
reduced by 30 percent for nonresidential uses and 53 percent for residential uses in order to reflect
consistency with the Title 24 standard.
The project will require submittal to the appropriate agencies discussed in this section for review and
approval of on-site design for circulation, building standards and utility installation to ensure compliance
with Title 24 requirements. Implementation of energy conservation measures discussed in this and other
sections of this Draft EIR will help to reduce the impacts on energy resources.
Project Design Features
The GHG Report and the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan outlined energy-saving and sustainable
project design features (PDFs) that would be incorporated into the design of the project as required
under the terms of the Development Agreement. The PDFs listed in the GHG Report are proposed to
lower energy consumption and GHG emissions by implementing the following:
• 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 to the project site. The project would minimize barriers to pedestrian access and
interconnectivity by providing sidewalks throughout the property connecting to Avenue 60, and
multi -use trails connecting Planning Areas I, II and III to Madison Street.
• 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.
• 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.
• Commute Trip Reduction Program — Voluntary, Is a multi -strategy program that encompasses a
combination of individual measures. It is presented as a means of preventing double -counting of
reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a
maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a
voluntary program.
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute
trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees. Alternative work schedules could take the form
of staggered starting times, flexible schedules, or compressed work weeks.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-18 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
• This project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually
service employees' commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and
surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer
purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program
administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a
mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer's purview, and rider charges are normally set on
the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
• 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
2019 Title 24 Standards which is estimated to result in 30 percent less energy use for non-
residential buildings and 53 percent less energy use for residential use.
• The project is required to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (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. A minimum of 15 percent of the project's
electricity demand will be generated on-site.
The PDFs above were accounted for in CaIEEMod to reduce GHG emissions and energy consumption
associated with each applicable subcategory (i.e., electricity use and petroleum consumption). The
implementation of the PDFs listed above at the project site would reduce operational electricity use by
approximately 17.2 percent, and operational petroleum consumption by approximately 11 percent. This
is analyzed in greater detail in the subsequent discussions.
Energy-saving and sustainable design features, as well as operational programs would be incorporated.
Because these features/attributes are integral to the project, and/or are regulatory requirements, they
are not considered to be mitigation measures. The project will require submittal to the appropriate
agencies discussed in this section for review and approval of on-site design for circulation, building
standards and utility installation. The following PDFs are part of the project; however, per the GHG
Report, no numeric credit has been taken for their implementation in order to produce a conservative
analysis:
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances
• Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures
• Installation of tankless water heaters
• Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes
• Use of recycled water (non -potable) for common area landscape irrigation
• Use of drought -tolerant plants in landscape design
• Installation of water -efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls
• Installation of photovoltaic (PV) systems
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-19 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Please consult Section 1.7, Sustainability and Project Design Features, in the Coral Mountain Resort
Specific Plan, the GHG Report (Appendix I), and Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Draft EIR
for a complete list of the proposed project design features. Implementation of energy conservation
measures discussed in this and other sections of this Draft EIR will help to reduce the impacts on energy
resources.
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 previously, the project site is currently undeveloped. 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
During construction of the proposed project, energy resources would be consumed in the form of
electricity and petroleum. As discussed below, construction activities, including the construction of new
buildings and facilities, typically do not involve the consumption of natural gas. Electricity consumed is
associated with the conveyance of water used for dust control, and on a limited basis, powering lights,
electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power. Petroleum-based
fuels are associated with the use of off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the project site,
construction worker travel to and from the site, and delivery and haul truck trips (e.g., hauling of
demolition material to off-site reuse and disposal facilities).
Electricity
During construction of the proposed project, electricity would be consumed to supply and convey water
for dust control and, on a limited basis, may be used to power lighting, and electronic equipment.
Electricity consumed for onsite construction trailers, which are used by managerial staff during the hours
of construction activities and other construction activities necessitating electrical power would be
provided by IID. As displayed in Table 4.5-2, a total of approximately 57,987.3 kWh of electricity is
anticipated to be consumed during construction. This is based on the water for dust control, which is
calculated from the total days of grading, the acreage disturbed on the project site along with water
usage factor per day and a water supply electricity intensity factor. This is further explained in Table 4.5-
2, Summary of Electricity Use During Construction, which outlines the amount of electricity consumed
during each phase of construction, as determined by the CaIEEMod calculations.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-20 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Table 4.5-2 Summary of Electricity Use During Construction
Phase
Construction Phase
Days Grading
Acres Graded
(Per Day)
Electricity Consumed
(kWh)
1
Site Preparation
40
3.5
4,112.575
Grading
110
4
11,750.216
2
Site Preparation
1
1
29.375
Grading
2
1.5
88.126
3
Site Preparation
180
3.5
18,506.590
Grading
200
4
23,500.432
Total Electricity Consumed
57,987.3
Note: Electricity Consumed is determined by: Days Grading x Acres (acres disturbed during grading) x 3,020
gallons per acre per day (Air and Waste Management Association, 1992) x 0.009727 kWh/gallons
(CaIEEMod default for Salton Sea Air Basin) is 1,909.4 kWh].
The electricity demand at any given time would vary throughout the construction period based on
construction activities being performed and would cease upon completion of construction. When not in
use, electric equipment would be powered off so as to avoid unnecessary energy consumption. The
estimated construction electricity usage represents approximately 0.67 percent of the project's
estimated annual operational demand, which, as discussed below, would be within the supply and
infrastructure service capabilities of IID. The percentage is derived by taking the total amount of
electricity usage during construction (57,987.3 kWh) and dividing that number by the total amount of
electricity during operation (8,642,729 kWh) to obtain 0.67 percent.
Natural Gas
Natural gas is not anticipated to be required during construction of the project. Fuels used for
construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which are discussed in the Transportation
Energy subsection.
Transportation Energy
Petroleum would be consumed throughout construction of the project. Fuel consumed by construction
equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction, while VMT
associated with the transportation of construction materials and construction worker commutes would
also result in petroleum consumption. Heavy-duty equipment used for project construction would rely
on diesel fuel, as would haul trucks involved in off -hauling materials from site clearing or excavation.
Construction workers would travel to and from the project site throughout the duration of construction.
It is assumed that construction workers would travel to and from the project property in gasoline -
powered passenger vehicles. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that
would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-21 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
activities, or use of equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel
efficiencies).
Heavy-duty construction equipment of various types would be used during each phase of construction
of the project. CaIEEMod was used to estimate construction equipment usage. 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 shown in the tables provided.
Table 4.5-3, Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Worker Gasoline Demand, illustrates the demand of gasoline
fuel for construction worker trips to and from the site during each construction phase, and phase of
development. Construction worker gasoline demand during each phase of development equals a total
of 498,138 gallons of gasoline fuel.
Table 4.5-3 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Worker Gasoline Demand
Phase
Const. Phase
Days
Trips
Miles
VMT
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Gallons
1
Site Prep.
40
18
11
7,920
2,497.1
8.89*
281
Grading
110
20
11
24,200
7,588.2
8.89
855
Building Const.
200
823
11
1,810,600
551,758.5
8.89
62,065
Paving
75
15
11
12,375
3,771.1
8.89
424
Arch. Coating
75
165
11
136,125
41,482.5
8.89
4,666
Phase 1 Construction Total
98,291
2
Site Prep.
1
5
11
55
16.2
8.89
1.82
Grading
2
10
11
220
64.6
8.89
7.27
Building Const.
100
16
11
17,600
5,112.7
8.89
575.11
Paving
5
18
11
990
279.6
8.89
31.45
Arch. Coating
5
3
11
165
46.6
8.89
5.24
Phase 2 Construction Total
621
3
Site Prep.
180
18
11
35,640
9,957.1
8.89
1,120
Grading
200
20
11
44,000
11,964.2
8.89
1,346
Building Const.
500
2,197
11
12,083,500
3,107,820.9
8.89
349,586
Paving
330
15
11
54,450
13,856.3
8.89
1,559
Arch. Coating
330
439
11
1,593,570
405,526.3
8.89
45,616
Phase 3 Construction Total
399,227
Total Construction Gasoline Demand
498,139
*https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator
Table 4.5-4, Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Vendor Diesel Demand, illustrates the demand of diesel fuel
for construction vendor trips to and from the site during each construction phase, and phase of
development. These trips are associated with the delivery of construction materials during the building
construction phase. Construction vendor demand during each phase of development equals a total of
468,038 gallons of diesel fuel.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-22 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Table 4.5-4 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Vendor Diesel Demand
Phase
Const. Phase
Days
Trips
Miles
VMT
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Gallons
1
Site Prep.
40
0
0
0
0
10.18*
0
Grading
110
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Building Const.
200
302
5.40
326,160
623,619.5
10.18
61,259
Paving
75
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Arch. Coating
75
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Phase 1 Construction Total
61,259
2
Site Prep.
1
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Grading
2
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Building Const.
100
7
5.40
3,780
7,108.2
10.18
698
Paving
5
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Arch. Coating
5
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Phase 2 Construction Total
698
3
Site Prep.
180
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Grading
200
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Building Const.
500
843
5.40
2,276,100
4,133,905.4
10.18
406,081
Paving
330
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Arch. Coating
330
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Phase 3 Construction Total
406,081
Total Construction Diesel Demand
468,038
*https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator
Table 4.5-5, Phase 1 Construction Hauling Diesel Demand, illustrates the demand of diesel fuel for on-
site grading hauling trips within the site during Phase 1 of construction. These trips are associated with
hauling during the grading construction phase. Because the site will be mass graded in Phase 1, all
hauling demand will occur during that phase. Construction hauling demand during grading of Phase 1
equals a total of 2,647 gallons of diesel fuel.
Table 4.5-5 Phase 1 Construction Hauling Diesel Demand
Phase
Const. Phase
Days
Trips
Miles
VMT
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Gallons
1
Site Prep.
40
0
0
0
0
10.18*
0
Grading
110
3,282
1
361,020
26,951.4
10.18
2,647
Building Const.
200
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Paving
75
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Arch. Coating
75
0
0
0
0
10.18
0
Total Construction Hauling Diesel Demand
2,647
*https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator
Table 4.5-6, Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Equipment Diesel Fuel Demand, displays the demand of
diesel fuel for construction vehicles on-site during the various construction phases. Construction
equipment diesel demands for each phase of project development equals a total of 342,401 gallons of
diesel fuel.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.5-23
June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Table 4.5-6 Phase 1, 2 and 3 Construction Equipment Diesel Fuel Demand
Phase
Const. Phase
Days
Equipment
Units
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Gallons
1
Site Prep.
40
7
101,028.4
10.18*
9,924
Grading
110
8
348,329.7
10.18
34,217
Building Const.
200
9
375,796.5
10.18
36,915
Paving
75
6
75,695.1
10.18
7,436
Arch. Coating
75
1
12,788.2
10.18
1,256
Phase 1 Construction Total
89,748
2
Site Prep.
1
5
1,774.8
10.18
174
Grading
2
6
3,726.8
10.18
366
Building Const.
100
7
146,217.7
10.18
14,363
Paving
5
9
5,167.6
10.18
508
Arch. Coating
5
1
852.4
10.18
84
Phase 2 Construction Total
15,495
3
Site Prep.
180
7
453,883.0
10.18
44,586
Grading
200
8
633,168.6
10.18
62,197
Building Const.
500
9
937,988.0
10.18
92,140
Paving
330
6
332,988.1
10.18
32,710
Arch. Coating
330
1
56,248.2
10.18
5,525
Phase 3 Construction Total
237,158
Total Construction Equipment Diesel Demand
342,401
*https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator
Overall, the project is estimated to consume approximately 498,139 gallons of gasoline and 813,086
gallons of diesel fuel during the project's construction phases. In total, the project will consume
approximately 1,311,244 gallons of petroleum between years 2020 to 2026. Petroleum use is necessary
to operate construction equipment. The US EPA applied a Tier 3 program in order to reduce the impacts
of motor vehicles on air quality and public health. The vehicle emissions standards will reduce both
tailpipe and evaporative emissions from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium duty passenger
vehicles, and some heavy-duty vehicles. The gasoline sulfur standard will enable more stringent vehicle
emissions standards and will make emissions control systems more effective for both existing and new
vehicles. Removing sulfur allows the vehicle's catalyst to work more efficiently. Lower sulfur gasoline
also facilitates the development of some lower-cost technologies to improve fuel economy and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, which reduces gasoline consumption. As stated in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of
this Draft EIR, the construction contractor shall ensure that off-road diesel construction equipment
(greater than 150 horsepower) complies with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air
Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 emissions standards. Additionally, the construction contractor shall
ensure that all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
specifications. This is identified as Mitigation Measure AQ -2. The use of Tier 3 engines or higher during
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-24 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
project construction would assist in reducing construction -related gasoline consumption at the project
site.
The energy used during the construction of the project would be limited to the development of the
project and would not require long-term petroleum use. Additionally, there are no unusual project
characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more
energy intensive than is used for comparable activities, or use of equipment that would not conform to
current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies). Mitigation Measure AQ -2 requires that off-
road diesel construction equipment (greater than 150 horsepower) complies with EPA/CARB Tier 3
emissions standards. The implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -2 would assist in reducing
construction -related gasoline consumption at the project site, and project construction would not
consume petroleum in a wasteful or inefficient manner.
Construction Energy Consumption Conclusion
As shown in Table 4.5-7, Summary of Energy Use During Construction, a total of 57,987.3 kilowatt-hours
(kWh) of electricity, 808,764 gallons of diesel fuel, and 498,139 gallons of gasoline are estimated to be
consumed in total during the construction of the project (all three phases). Construction of the project
is anticipated to be complete in 2026 (see Table 4.5-1, Coral Mountain Resort Construction Duration).
Table 4.5-7 Summary of Energy Use During Construction
Fuel Type
Units
Total Project Energy Use
Electricity
kWh
57,987.3
Diesel
Gallons
813,086
Gasoline
Gallons
498,139
Notes: Electricity for the project is total construction usage. Mobile gasoline and diesel
usage were calculated using the figures provided in the CaIEEMod model.
Operation
Electricity
The project proposes the operation of residential, resort, commercial and open space uses on
approximately 386 -acre of vacant land in the City of La Quinta. The project will be required to install an
off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600 Avenue 58 and extend a
distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed along Avenue 58 as part of the
proposed upgrades. Construction of the conduits and line extensions would occur in the existing right-
of-way. Offsite electrical improvements will occur during Phase I of the development and will only serve
the project.
The CaIEEMod program utilized in this analysis calculated the project's potential operational electricity
usage by splitting up the land uses into appropriate categories. The categories consistent with the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-25 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
proposed project include apartment low rise, hotel, regional shopping center, single family housing and
user defined recreational. Definitions of these land uses are provided in the CaIEEMod manual. Since
CaIEEMod does not provide a land use subtype that accurately defines the proposed Wave Basin, the
"User Defined" land use subtype was utilized when inputting the values into CaIEEMod. The
characteristics of the Wave Basin (i.e., size, function, etc.,) were included to determine the energy
consumed by the operation of the facility.
According to the CaIEEMod calculations, provided in the GHG Analysis, the project is expected to
generate demand for approximately 8,263,869 kWh of annual electricity use for the entire project at
build -out. The four project special events are anticipated to generate a total of approximately 378,859
kWh of annual electricity demand. Cumulative electricity demand for project operation and special event
operations will generate an annual demand of 8,642,729 kWh of electricity (taking into account the
energy -reducing project design features described below).
The project would incorporate several project design features (PDFs) directed at minimizing energy use.
These measures include installing photovoltaic (PV) systems to generate a minimum of 15% of the power
demand, or 1,310.6 MWh for the project, high efficiency lighting, and 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, which would be at least 30 percent more energy-efficient for non-residential
buildings and 53 percent less energy for residential uses due to lighting upgrades. As determined by the
CaIEEMod calculations, the implementation of the above project design features would result in a 17.2
percent reduction in electricity consumed by the proposed project. This reduction is shown in the table
below.
Table 4.5-8
Project Electricity Demand With and Without PDFs
* Electricity use associated with project operation including the four proposed special
events are included in the without and with PDF columns.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-26 June 2021
Electricity Use
kWh/yr
Land Use
Project Without PDFs*
Project With PDFs*
Apartments Low Rise
412,453
345,198
Hotel
4,003,840
3,260,870
Other Asphalt Surfaces
0
0
Regional Shopping Center
574,800
456,511
Single Family Housing
3,650,260
3,051,720
User Defined Recreational
1,798,160
1,528,430
Total Electricity Demand
10,439,513
8,642,729
Percent Reduction
17.2 percent
* Electricity use associated with project operation including the four proposed special
events are included in the without and with PDF columns.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-26 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Additional project design features include:
• Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures
• Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes
• Use of recycled water (non -potable) for common area landscape irrigation
• Use of drought -tolerant plants in landscape design
• Installation of water -efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls
These project design features were not accounted for in the CaIEEMod calculations, however, their
implementation would result in reduced electricity consumption.
The La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report (LQGP EIR) predicts that buildout of residential
and commercial uses in the General Plan, including the proposed project site, 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. The proposed project is
anticipated to consume approximately 8,642,729 kWh/year, which is approximately 0.80 percent of the
City's electrical consumption at total build -out.
As mentioned previously, the IID planning area used approximately 1,248.4 gigawatt hours (GWh) of
electricity in the commercial sector and 1,693.5 GWh of electricity in the residential sector, for a total of
2,941.9 GWh in 2019. 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 new annual electrical
consumption of 8,642,729 kWh (which is equivalent to 8,642.73 MWh), the project would account for
approximately 0.19 percent of IID's total estimated demand in 2031.
In addition to the listed project design features, IID has indicated that the project will be required to
connect to an existing IID electrical substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58, in order to provide electrical
services to the project. In a will serve letter dated May 26, 2020, IID indicated that the project can extend
electrical facilities to serve the site, under the developmental conditions of service stated in the letter,
including requiring the applicant to bear all costs associated with construction of the utility work, as well
as requirements of the utility provider during each phase of project development. The project's
connection to the substation will only serve the project site. The project's connection to IID's facility will
not result in a significant increase in energy demand because energy codes established by the state and
implemented by IID will be applied to the project to reduce energy consumption and increase energy
efficiency. These energy reduction features include the PDFs listed previously in this discussion.
IID also analyzes their existing facilities and capacity to support the population and future growth within
the service area in order to ensure reliable service. Additionally, IID continues to invest in alternative and
renewable energy sources and storage of renewable energy, to provide alternative energy to the service
area. Based on the project's implementation of PDFs and IID's review of the project, with the project's
connection to the IID substation, it is anticipated that IID's existing and planned electricity capacity and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-27 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
electricity supplies would be sufficient to support the project's demand and would not result in a
significant increase in energy demand.
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.
Implementing rooftop solar and energy-efficient design features will both generate electricity onsite,
and reduce electricity consumption, respectively. Further, submittal, review, and approval of project
plans through the City and IID would ensure future electricity demand will comply with all applicable
requirements, and will not exceed IID's service capacity. Impacts will be less than significant.
Natural Gas
According to the La Quinta General Plan, the demand for natural gas for a household in the City 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 unit used in the CaIEEMod calculations. Therefore, the
approximately 23,489 households in the City would consume approximately 683,365,477 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.
Natural gas would be directly consumed throughout operation of the proposed project, primarily
through building heating, water heating, and cooking. Natural gas consumption at the project site was
calculated using CaIEEMod's default values for apartments low rise, hotel, regional shopping center, and
single family housing. The proposed Wave Basin will not be heated; therefore, the operation of the
facility will not result in the consumption of natural gas. Based on the CaIEEMod calculations, the project
is estimated to consume approximately 20,897,355 thousand British thermal units (kBTU) of natural gas
annually during operation of the various land uses. Project special events are anticipated to generate
approximately 958,045 kBTU of annual natural gas demand. Cumulative natural gas demand, for project
operation and special event operations, will generate an annual demand of 21,855,400 kBTU. This is
displayed in Table 4.5-9, Proposed Project Operational and Special Events Natural Gas Demand.
Table 4.5-9 Proposed Project Operational and Special Events Natural Gas Demand
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-28
June 2021
Natural Gas Use
kBTU/yr
Land Use
Project Operational
Special Events
Apartments Low Rise
1,045,719
47,941
Hotel
11,421,957
523,643
Regional Shopping Center'
94,087
4,313
Single Family Housing
8,335,592
382,148
Total
20,897,355
958,045
Cumulative Natural Gas Demand
21,855,400
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-28
June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Note: 1. The land uses indicated in the table are categories determined by CaIEEMod modelling. A
regional shopping center is not proposed for the project site, however, the commercial uses
proposed for the project correlate with the standards and characters of the Regional Shopping
Center land use category, per CaIEEMod.
Note: 21,855,400 kBTU/yr is approximately 57,741.4 cf/day per the 1 cf to 1.037 kBTU conversion
and 365 days a year.
According to the LQGP EIR, at General Plan build -out, residential units will use approximately
919,426,079 cubic feet of natural gas per year (cf/year). For commercial uses, consumption will be
approximately 512,618,978.28 cf/year. At buildout, the City is expected to consume approximately
1,432,045,057.28 cubic feet per year in the residential and commercial sectors. This number is equivalent
to 1,485,030,724.4 kBTU. According to Urban Crossroad's GHG Analysis, the project is anticipated to
consume approximately 21,855,400 kBTU/year, which is approximately 1.47 percent of the City's natural
gas consumption at build -out of the City.
Based on the 2018 California Gas Report, the California Energy and Electric Utilities 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 0.0025 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 California Code of Regulations (CCR) regarding energy
consumption. As a part of the project design features to reduce energy consumption, the project will
implement the use of:
• Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
The implementation of the project design features listed throughout this Energy Section 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.
Further, submittal, review, and approval of project plans through City and SoCalGas would ensure
implementation of the project design features, and that SoCalGas can satisfy the future natural gas
demands. Impacts would be less than significant.
Transportation Energy
The consumption and use of petroleum-based fuels related to vehicular travel to and from the project
site are anticipated during operation of the project. The GHG Analysis calculated the project's estimated
annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) using CaIEEMod. Per the GHG Analysis, the project's operational
emissions were calculated between two main scenarios, including "Proposed Project Operational", and
"Special Events Operational".
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-29 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Proposed Project Operational Scenario
The Proposed Project Operational model calculated the annual project VMT as a result of project
buildout. Project operational VMTs within each land use in this scenario are depicted in the table below.
Table 4.5-10 Proposed Project Operational VMT
Note: Project Buildout is the cumulative annual VMT value
assuming total project buildout.
Per the CaIEEMod calculations for the Proposed Project Operational scenario, the average daily trip
(ADT) rate will total 9,925.9 on the weekdays, 10,580.9 on Saturdays, and 8,179.4 on Sundays. CaIEEMod
assumes 92.5 percent of VMT burns gasoline, while the remaining 7.5 percent burn diesel. Project
operation would have an annual gasoline demand of 686,959 gallons and an annual diesel demand of
48,641 gallons, as displayed in Table 4.5-11, Proposed Project Operational Annual Petroleum. The ADT
rate was provided by CaIEEMod, which provides estimates for emissions. The ADT utilized in this Energy
Resources section may vary from the ADTs calculated in the project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis
(Appendix 1.1), which utilizes RIVTAM modeling for ADT and VMTs.
Table 4.5-11
Proposed Project Operational Annual Petroleum
Annual VMT
Land Use
Project Buildout
Apartments Low Rise
1,089,825
Hotel
2,537,078
Other Asphalt Surfaces
--
Regional Shopping Center
5,055,941
Single Family Housing
6,968,724
User Defined Recreational
2,827,337
Total Annual VMT
18,478,905
Note: Project Buildout is the cumulative annual VMT value
assuming total project buildout.
Per the CaIEEMod calculations for the Proposed Project Operational scenario, the average daily trip
(ADT) rate will total 9,925.9 on the weekdays, 10,580.9 on Saturdays, and 8,179.4 on Sundays. CaIEEMod
assumes 92.5 percent of VMT burns gasoline, while the remaining 7.5 percent burn diesel. Project
operation would have an annual gasoline demand of 686,959 gallons and an annual diesel demand of
48,641 gallons, as displayed in Table 4.5-11, Proposed Project Operational Annual Petroleum. The ADT
rate was provided by CaIEEMod, which provides estimates for emissions. The ADT utilized in this Energy
Resources section may vary from the ADTs calculated in the project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis
(Appendix 1.1), which utilizes RIVTAM modeling for ADT and VMTs.
Table 4.5-11
Proposed Project Operational Annual Petroleum
Special Events Operational Scenario
The project proposes special events at the project site involving attendance of up to 2,500 guests per
day (up to 4 events per year, maximum 4 -day duration), in addition to operational activities. The Special
Events Operational model calculated the annual project VMTs with the occurrence of these special
events. Per the CaIEEMod calculations, the four proposed special events at the project site are
anticipated to generate 358,613 VMTs annually (approximately 89,653.25 VMTs per special event). The
average daily trip rate (as referred to in the CaIEEMod calculations) being approximately 555.6 per day.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-30 June 2021
Annual VMT
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Annual Gallons
Gasoline
17,129,945
6,107,065
8.89
686,959
Diesel
1,348,960
495,167
10.18
48,641
Total Annual Petroleum
735,600
Special Events Operational Scenario
The project proposes special events at the project site involving attendance of up to 2,500 guests per
day (up to 4 events per year, maximum 4 -day duration), in addition to operational activities. The Special
Events Operational model calculated the annual project VMTs with the occurrence of these special
events. Per the CaIEEMod calculations, the four proposed special events at the project site are
anticipated to generate 358,613 VMTs annually (approximately 89,653.25 VMTs per special event). The
average daily trip rate (as referred to in the CaIEEMod calculations) being approximately 555.6 per day.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-30 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
The ADT utilized in this Energy Resources section may vary from the ADTs calculated in the project -
specific Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix L.1), which utilizes RIVTAM modeling for ADT and VMTs.
Table 4.5-12
Special Events Operational VMT
Land Use
Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise
16,323
Hotel
30,495
Other Asphalt Surfaces
--
Regional Shopping Center
93,419
Single Family Housing
93,364
User Defined Recreational
125,012
Total
358,613
As previously determined, CaIEEMod assumes 92.5 percent of VMT burns gasoline, while the remaining
7.5 percent burn diesel. Special events operations would have an annual gasoline demand of 13,184
gallons and an annual diesel demand of 933 gallons, as displayed in Table 4.5-13, Special Events
Operational Annual Petroleum.
Table 4.5-13
Special Events Operational Annual Petroleum
Based on the CaIEEMod calculations provided for project operation and special event operation for the
Coral Mountain Resort, operation of the project will generate 18,838,360 VMTs cumulatively. Petroleum
demand for the cumulative project would consume approximately 700,143 gallons of gasoline, and
49,574 gallons of diesel. Cumulatively, the project would consume approximately 749,717 gallons of
petroleum.
Over the lifetime of the project, the fuel efficiency of vehicles in use is expected to increase, as older
vehicles are replaced with newer more efficient models. Therefore, it is expected that the amount of
petroleum consumed due to the vehicle trips to and from the project site during operation would
decrease over time. California's Senate Bill 350 was established in 2015 to reduce petroleum use by 50
percent by the year 2030, compared to 2015 consumption. This is achieved through advancement of
technology, which includes the use of plug-in hybrid and zero emission vehicles in California. With the
foregoing, operation of the project is expected to use decreasing amounts of petroleum over time.
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, in Section 1.7, Sustainability and Project Design Features,
establishes programs and project design features (PDFs) that promote energy efficiency and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-31 June 2021
Annual VMT
KgCO2e
Kg/CO2/Gallon
Annual Gallons
Gasoline
331,717
_ 117,204.9
8.89
13,184
Diesel
26,896
9,503
10.18
933
Total Annual Petroleum
14,117
Based on the CaIEEMod calculations provided for project operation and special event operation for the
Coral Mountain Resort, operation of the project will generate 18,838,360 VMTs cumulatively. Petroleum
demand for the cumulative project would consume approximately 700,143 gallons of gasoline, and
49,574 gallons of diesel. Cumulatively, the project would consume approximately 749,717 gallons of
petroleum.
Over the lifetime of the project, the fuel efficiency of vehicles in use is expected to increase, as older
vehicles are replaced with newer more efficient models. Therefore, it is expected that the amount of
petroleum consumed due to the vehicle trips to and from the project site during operation would
decrease over time. California's Senate Bill 350 was established in 2015 to reduce petroleum use by 50
percent by the year 2030, compared to 2015 consumption. This is achieved through advancement of
technology, which includes the use of plug-in hybrid and zero emission vehicles in California. With the
foregoing, operation of the project is expected to use decreasing amounts of petroleum over time.
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, in Section 1.7, Sustainability and Project Design Features,
establishes programs and project design features (PDFs) that promote energy efficiency and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-31 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
sustainability which will reduce VMTs and energy consumption. The regional VMTs and associated
vehicular -source emissions are reduced by the following project design features/attributes:
• 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.
• Having 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.
• The project will include improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity.
• Implementation of ride sharing programs (including vanpool, and designated ride -share
vehicle parking) and employer-sponsored shuttle services to reduce commute trips.
Increasing the vehicle occupancy by ride sharing will result in fewer cards driving the same
trip, reducing VMTs.
The mixed-use characteristics of the project, combined with walkability and connectivity design
elements, optimize on-site interaction and result in lower VMT compared to standalone uses. The
proposed project design features/attributes (listed above) reduce the project's petroleum use by
approximately 11 percent during operation of the project and special events. The numbers displayed in
Tables 4.5-10 through 4.5-13 indicate the 11 percent reduction of petroleum use.
The Specific Plan proposes alternative forms of transportation while providing for vehicular access
through a roadway network that interconnects all land uses within the project. The multi -modal
transportation system proposed for the project will decrease automobile dependency by providing
transportation facilities for a variety of user groups including motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers
of electric vehicles. With this goal in mind, the backbone system of circulating roadways throughout the
Specific Plan with multiple access points will serve as vehicular and multi -use transportation routes for
residents and visitors.
Access and parking in close proximity to retail and resort areas for visitors is proposed for 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 the
following design features that will comply with Chapter 9.180, Transportation Demand Management of
the La Quinta Municipal Code:
• Off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths/routes;
• Sidewalks in higher traffic areas;
• Enhanced pedestrian/bicycle crosswalks;
• Pedestrian and multi -use paths and streets;
• Traffic calming methods;
• Short street segments with frequent caution zones and stopping points;
• Golf cart and other alternative forms of personal transportation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-32 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Providing multi -modal transportation within the project will allow guests and residents to participate in
other 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.
Although the project would result in an increase in petroleum use during construction and operation
compared to the existing conditions, the project would implement measures required under the LQGP
Policy CIR-1.12 and Policy CIR-2.2, and City Municipal Code Chapter 9.180. 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. While Policy CIR-2.2 encourages
reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by reducing vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours of
delay by increasing or encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation, and implementing
and managing a hierarchy of complete street multimodal transportation infrastructure and programs to
deliver improved mobility and reduce GHG emissions. Given these considerations, petroleum
consumption associated with the project operation would not be considered excessive.
In addition to the diverse land uses located adjacent to one another, and the implementation of a multi-
modal transportation system, 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 energy is required per mile traveled. Although the
project will result in a direct increase in VMTs, the project will not interfere with increased full efficiency
standards and will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of transportation
energy resources during operation. Impacts will be less than significant.
Operational Energy Consumption
No adverse effects to nonrenewable energy resources are anticipated with the development of the
proposed project. Furthermore, the project would not result in the use of excessive amounts of fuel or
electricity and would not result in the need to develop additional sources of energy. As shown in Table
4.5-14, Summary of Annual Energy Use During Operation, the project's new energy demand would be
approximately 8,642,729 kWh of electricity per year, 21,855,400 thousand British thermal units, (kBTU)
of natural gas per year, and 749,717 gallons of petroleum fuel per year. The project's buildout outputs
are displayed in the table below.
Table 4.5-14, Summary of Annual Energy Use During Operation
Source
Units
Project Buildout
Electricity Total
kWh/yr
8,642,729
Natural Gas Total
kBTU/yr
21,855,400
Petroleum Total
Gallons
749,717
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-33
June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Notes: kWh/year = thousand kilowatt-hours per year; kBTU/yr = thousand British Thermal Units per
year. Electricity and Natural Gas for the project is total operational usage. Mobile gasoline and diesel
usage were calculated using the figures provided in the CaIEEMod calculations.
Conclusion
The project will design building shells and building components, such as windows, roof systems and
electrical and lighting systems to meet Building Code standards in effect at the time development occurs,
which would be at least 30 percent more energy-efficient for non-residential buildings and 53 percent
more energy efficient for residential use due to lighting upgrades. These measures will ensure project -
related operational energy use is reduced by implementing building shells and components that comply
with building code standards.
The project would increase demand for energy in the project area and in the service areas of IID and
SoCal Gas Company. The proposed project would also increase the petroleum demand during
construction and operation of the site. However, based on the findings described above, project
construction and operation are not anticipated to result in potentially significant impacts due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation. Impacts will be less than significant.
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency
As discussed previously, the project site is currently vacant. Electricity and natural gas will be provided
to the project property by Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and the Southern California Gas Company.
The project is proposing a mixed-use development that will include 496 low density residential dwelling
units, a 150 -room resort, 57,000 square feet of resort commercial space, 104 resort residential dwellings,
an artificial surf Wave basin, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, and open space
recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres. As a part of project implementation, the project will be
required to install an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600 Avenue 58
as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extensions would occur in the
existing right-of-way.
Consistency Analysis
The proposed project's consistency with relevant state and local plans for renewable energy or energy
efficiency is provided below.
EPA/CARB Tier 3 Emissions Standards
The US EPA implements a Tier 3 program in order to reduce the impacts of motor vehicles on air quality
and public health. The vehicle emissions standards will reduce both tailpipe and evaporative emissions
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-34 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium duty passenger vehicles, and some heavy-duty vehicles.
As stated in Section 4.2, Air Quality, and in discussion a.) of this Energy Resources section, the project
is required to operate off-road diesel construction equipment (greater than 150 horsepower) that
complies with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3
emissions standards. Additionally, all construction equipment must be tuned and maintained in
accordance with the manufacturer's specifications, as required in Mitigation Measure AQ -2. The use of
Tier 3 engines or higher during project construction would assist in reducing construction -related
gasoline consumption at the project site. The project will comply with the EPA/CARB Tier 3 emissions
standards.
Title 24
Title 24's Building Energy Efficiency Standards, is designed to reduce wasteful and unnecessary energy
consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings. The standards are updated periodically to
allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. In
December 2018, the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2019 Building and Energy
Efficiency Standards with the effective date beginning January 1, 2020. This code requires new homes to
include at least 50 percent of kitchen lighting to be LED, compact fluorescent or similar high efficiency
fixtures, double pane windows, cool roofs, and other design techniques to reduce heat loss.
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 2019 CALGreen standards became effective on January 1, 2020.
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 implement PDFs, such as the installation of
light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes, in order 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 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.
La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
The City of La Quinta's General Plan and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan also outlines measures
to reduce energy consumed by existing and future developments within the City. The GHG Reduction
Plan includes measures to reduce energy use, conserve energy, and improve energy efficiency. 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-35 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
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 to reduce energy consumed. 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 California Building Code Title
24, 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 to 10
percent of landscaped areas. ND -2 works towards carbon neutrality for new buildings through design
measures, onsite renewables, and offsets. ND -3 encourages all new development to meet 50 percent of
energy demand through onsite solar or other non-polluting sources. These energy reduction measures
are also included in the City's General Plan. Developments are required to adhere to state and local
standards for energy efficiency to reduce energy consumed by development. The project's PDFs listed
throughout this section and below will reduce project -related energy consumption. The project will
conform to the GHG Reduction Plan.
La Quinta General Plan
Natural Resources Element
The project site is located within the City of La Quinta, therefore, local energy efficiency standards within
Chapter III, Natural Resources, of the La Quinta General Plan are applicable to the project site. The
Natural Resources Chapter summarizes the key general plan policies that support the City's goals for air
quality, energy and mineral resources, biological resources, cultural resources, water resources, and
open space and conservation. As previously discussed, the project is not anticipated to result in
potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources during construction or operation. Additionally, goals, policies, and programs related to
reducing energy consumption, through the use of alternative forms of energy or sustainable design
features are included in the PDFs for the proposed project:
• Pedestrian connections shall be provided to surrounding areas consistent with the City's General
Plan. 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 to the
project site.
• The mixed-use property can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and
may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport.
• 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-36 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute
trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees.
• The project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually
service employees' commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and
surrounding commercial centers.
• 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
2019 Title 24 Standards which is estimated to result in 30 percent less energy use for non-
residential buildings and 53 percent less energy use for residential use.
• The project is required to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (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. A minimum of 15 percent of the project's
electricity demand will be generated on-site.
The PDFs above were accounted for in CaIEEMod to reduce energy consumption associated with each
applicable subcategory (i.e., electricity use and petroleum consumption). The following PDFs are also
part of the project:
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances
• Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures
• Installation of tankless water heaters
• Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes
• Use of recycled water (non -potable) for common area landscape irrigation
• Use of drought -tolerant plants in landscape design
• Installation of water -efficient irrigation systems with smart sensor controls
• Installation of photovoltaic (PV) systems
With the implementation of the PDFs, which will be made enforceable by the City through the
Development Agreement, 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. While Policy CIR-2.2 encourages reduction of greenhouse gas
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-37 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
(GHG) emissions by reducing vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours of delay by increasing or
encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation, and implementing and managing a hierarchy
of complete street multimodal transportation infrastructure and programs to deliver improved mobility
and reduce GHG emissions.
The project will provide multiple transportation facilities for motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers
of electric vehicles throughout the property. Additionally, access and parking in close proximity to retail
and resort areas for visitors is proposed to allow residents of individual neighborhoods to access all
Planning Areas internally as well as public transportation systems. The project also proposes a mixed-
use development consisting of residential, commercial, resort, and recreational uses which reduces
vehicle miles traveled. Therefore, the project will comply with Policy CIR-1.12 and CIR-2.2.
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. This is 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).
The project will comply with CALGreen Building Codes and Title 24 codes and standards for both
residential and nonresidential components of the project. As previously stated, the project will provide
multiple transportation facilities for motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers of electric vehicles
throughout the property and connecting to public transportation systems. The project also proposes a
mixed-use development; therefore, the project is consistent with Policy SC -1.5 and associated programs
in the Livable Community Element in the General Plan.
4.5.5 Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative analysis for the project site considers the geographic context of IID's service area, SoCal
Gas's service area, as well as the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) boundary. Growth within these geographies,
partially attributable to the State's emphasis on housing development, is anticipated to increase the
demand for electricity, natural gas, and transportation energy, as well as the need for energy
infrastructure, such as 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 3,462.8 GWh of electricity in 2019. IID estimates that electricity consumption
within IID's planning area will be approximately 4,641,267 MWh annually by 2031. As discussed
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-38 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
previously, the project is anticipated to consume approximately 8,642.73 MWh per year, which is
approximately 0.19 percent of the IID's projected demand in 2031.
The proposed project, and other 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, both
in 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.
Buildout of the La Quinta General Plan 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 IID customers and future customers. As mentioned
previously, 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 new annual electrical consumption
of 8,642.73 MWh, the project would account for approximately 0.19 percent of IID's total estimated
demand in 2031. Although the demand for electricity will continue to increase with build out of projects
throughout the City, 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 extension of IID's existing substation facility will provide electricity to the project site only,
and will not facilitate additional development beyond that otherwise allowed under the General Plan.
Additionally, IID has established a rate structure that accommodates growth through the extension of
facilities, and implements energy reducing strategies and renewable energy alternatives that would be
available to future developments as technologies advance. Buildout of the General Plan area is expected
to occur over time. Therefore, IID's expansion plans will be adjusted to accommodate future growth in
the service area. Although build out 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 resources as technologies develop and IID's analysis of existing facilities and new facilities to
provide reliable service and IID's rate structure will assure that cumulative impacts are not considerable.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-39 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
Natural Gas
Buildout of the City of La Quinta, the project, related 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, programs, and projects 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 modest economic growth, and California Public Utility
Commission (CUPC)-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, a decline in
core commercial and industrial demand, 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 California Energy and Electric Utilities 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
0.0025 percent of the 2030 forecasted consumption in SoCalGas's planning area. 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 and fuel suppliers. 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, related projects, and additional forecasted growth would cumulatively increase
the demand for transportation related fuel in the State and region. The project's estimated petroleum -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-40 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
based fuel usage during operation would be approximately 749,717 gallons of petroleum fuel per year.
By comparison, the SSAB would consume approximately 326,288,400 gallons of total petroleum fuel for
2031. Furthermore, California consumes approximately 26 billion gallons of petroleum per year. The
anticipated increase in consumption associated with one year of the project operation is 0.003 percent
of the Statewide use.
Additionally, as described previously, petroleum accounts for 90 percent of California's transportation
energy sources; however, 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 fuels. According to the CEC, total gasoline per capita has declined by 6 percent since 2008,
and 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 fuel would
not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis provided above, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to energy
consumption (i.e., electricity, natural gas, and petroleum-based fuel) would not result in a cumulatively
considerable impact related to the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy during
construction or operation.
4.5.6 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are necessary. However, project design features, and Mitigation Measures
identified in Section 4.2, Air Quality, would minimize project impacts associated with energy use,
specifically petroleum consumption.
4.5.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Compliance with existing State, regional, and City regulations, plans, and programs, in addition to 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. The energy used during the
construction of the project would be limited to the development of the project and would not require
long-term petroleum use. Additionally, there are no unusual project characteristics or construction
processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used
for comparable activities, or use of equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards
(and related fuel efficiencies). Mitigation Measure AQ -2, which requires that off-road diesel
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-41 June 2021
4.5 ENERGY RESOURCES
construction equipment (greater than 150 horsepower) complies with EPA/CARB Tier 3 emissions
standards. The implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -2 would assist in reducing construction -
related gasoline consumption at the project site. Impacts associated with air emissions would be reduced
to less than significant levels.
4.5.8 Resources
1. CARB, EMFAC2017 Web Database, accessed June 2020, available at https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/
2. California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, California Energy Commission, Demand
Analysis Office, February 2018, accessed May 2020.
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, accessed May 2020.
5. California Energy Commission (CEC), California Energy Consumption Database, "Electricity
Consumption by Planning Area", accessed May 2020
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyplan.aspx
6. Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator — Calculations and References, Environmental
Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-
calculations-and-references, accessed August 2020.
7. Integrated Resource Plan, Imperial Irrigation District, November 2018,
https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/636927586520070000, accessed
April 2021.
8. Natural Gas and California, California Public Utilities Commission,
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural gas/, accessed August 2020.
9. Service Area Plan 2020, Imperial Irrigation District, October 2020,
https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18842, accessed April 2021.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.5-42 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.6 Geology and Soils
4.6 Geology and Soils
4,6.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing setting 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 Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan regarding proposed land uses;
the Geotechnical Investigation ("Geotechnical Investigation"), prepared by Sladden Engineering, Inc. in
2019; the Paleontological Resources Assessment, prepared by CRM Tech, in 2019; the City of La Quinta
General Plan 2035, and Technical Background Report to the Safety Element of the La Quinta 2035 General
Plan Update, 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 Investigation is included in the
EIR in Appendix F, and the Paleontological Resources Assessment is included in Appendix H.
Prior to the preparation of the Draft EIR, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared. The Coral
Mountain Resort NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. Following the screening criterion
related to geology and soils in the NOP, threshold topic "e" does not require additional analysis in this
Draft EIR.
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.
Issue areas found to have no impacts are further discussed in Chapter 6.0, Effects Found to have No
Impact, of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this
Draft EIR.
4.6.2 Existing Conditions
Regional
The project site is located within the City of La Quinta, in the Coachella Valley in the County of Riverside.
The Coachella Valley is located within the Colorado Desert Physiographic Province that is characterized
as a northwest -southeast trending structural depression extending from the Gulf of California to the
Banning Pass. The Coachella Valley is considered the westernmost extension of the Colorado Desert,
located south of the Mojave Desert in Imperial, Riverside, and San Diego Counties. The Colorado Desert
is bordered by the Peninsular Range and the Pacific Coastal Plain on the west and the Colorado River on
the east. 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-1 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
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. Due to the rain
shadow effect very little precipitation reaches the eastern slopes or the valley floor. The annual average
rainfall is 3.2 inches 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.
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 area. 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. Hazards such as landslide, structural damage or
destruction, liquefaction, and settlement are a potential result of rupture and strong seismic ground
shaking in the City of La Quinta.
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 its 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 north of the City of La Quinta. 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 south 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 trigger seismic
hazards such as ground shaking, landslides and liquefaction.
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 the physical world, which can cause phenomena such as
liquefaction and ground lurching).
Earthquakes release seismic energy that is measured in terms of intensity and magnitude. Several factors
determine the intensity of ground shaking, including the earthquake's magnitude, distance from the
epicenter, and soil and rock composition. A variety of logarithmic scales have been used by seismologists
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-2 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
to measure earthquakes. The most common measure of seismic intensity is the Modern Mercalli
Intensity (MMI) scale, which measures damage 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 earthquake magnitude as a function of amplitude of ground
motion at distance from the epicenter, based on a scale from one to ten.
Below is a table of the closest known active faults to the project site.
Table 4.6-1 Closest Known Active Faults
Fault Name
Distance (Km)
Maximum Event
San Andreas — Coachella
13.9
7.2
San Andreas — Southern
13.9
7.2
San Jacinto — Anza
27.3
7.2
San Jacinto — Coyote Creek
29.3
6.8
Burnt Mountain
37.7
6.5
Eureka Peak
39.2
6.4
San Andreas — San Bernardino
39.3
7.5
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 2035 La Quinta General
Plan (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 where development is located 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) and minor marine 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 Holocene -age soils, 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 or further
erodes. The latter creates fine particles that are carried along canyons and drainages downslope, and
are deposited as alluvial fans at the base of mountain slopes.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-3 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
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.
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. These
sediments are carried along the central axis of the valley, generally from the northwest to southeast,
creating blowsand. These soils are also generally considered compressible and unsuitable for
development without the implementation of specialized grading techniques.
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.,
earthquakes) and can cause regional damage. According to the 2035 La Quinta General Plan, the only
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. The Safety Element of the Riverside
County General Plan indicates that the project site is situated in an area both susceptible to ground
subsidence and an area with documented subsidence.
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. The soil particles may be partially supported by clay, silt or carbonate bonds.
When saturated, collapsible soils undergo a rearrangement of their grains and a loss of cementation,
resulting in substantial and rapid settlement under relatively light loads. An increase in surface water
infiltration, such as from irrigation, or a rise in the groundwater table, combined with the weight of a
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-4 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
building or structure, can initiate rapid settlement and cause foundations and walls to crack. Typically,
differential settlement of structures occurs when landscaping is heavily irrigated in close proximity to
the structure's foundation.
According to the 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.
Sewer
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides the City of La Quinta with sanitary sewer collection
and treatment, and according to the 2035 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 Reclamation Plant, which has the capacity of 9.5 million gallons per
day (MGD), and current daily treatment of 5 MGD. The Mid -Valley 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 site is located at the southwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58, therefore, will be
provided with sewer infrastructure.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources represent the remains of prehistoric life, exclusive of any human remains, and
include the localities where fossils were collected as well as the sedimentary rock formations in which
they were found. The defining character of fossils or fossil deposits is their geologic age, which is typically
regarded as older than approximately 12,000 years, the generally accepted temporal boundary marking
at the end of the last late Pleistocene (circa 2.6 million to 12,000 years B.P.) glaciation and the beginning
of the current Holocene epoch (circa 12,000 years B.P. to the present). Fossils are commonly found
within lacustrine sediments associated with ancient Lake Cahuilla.
Common fossil remains include marine shells; the bones and teeth of fish, amphibians, reptiles, and
mammals; leaf assemblages; and petrified wood. Fossil traces, another type of paleontological resource,
include internal and external molds (impressions) and casts created by these organisms. These items can
serve as important guides to the age of the rocks and sediments in which they are contained and may
prove useful in determining the temporal relationships between rock deposits from one area and those
from another as well as the timing of geologic events. They can also provide information regarding
evolutionary relationships, development trends, and environmental conditions.
Fossil resources generally occur only in areas of sedimentary rock (e.g., sandstone, siltstone, mudstone,
claystone, or shale). Because of the infrequency of fossil preservation, fossils, particularly vertebrate
fossils, are considered nonrenewable paleontological resources. Occasionally fossils may be exposed at
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-5 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
the surface through the process of natural erosion or because of human disturbances; however, they
generally lay buried beneath the surficial soils. Thus, the absence of fossils on the surface does not
preclude the possibility of their being present within subsurface deposits, while the presence of fossils
at the surface is often a good indication that more remains may be found in the subsurface.
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
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.
The Coachella Valley occupies the northwestern portion of the Colorado Desert geomorphic province.
Elevations within the Colorado Desert geomorphic province tend to be low, while those of the
surrounding provinces can be quite high. This configuration has made for local to regional rapid filling of
the basin, especially along its margins, with coarse clastic sediments. Such coarse sediments afford only
local environments for the preservation of vertebrate remains. However, some scattered vertebrate
fossils have been found in these fluvial derived clastic sediments. The shores of Holocene Lake Cahuilla,
a series of freshwater lakes that once filled portions of the Salton Trough, were present in the Coachella
Valley. The lake formed when water from the Colorado River flowed into the basin and then through
Baja California to the Gulf of California. The shoreline of the last ancient lake to fill the basin, at its high
stand prior to desiccation around 1700 A.D., reached the elevation of approximately 42 feet above mean
sea level.
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of ancient plants and animals. They occur in older
soils which have been deposited in the Valley over millions of years. Exhibit III -5, Paleontological
Sensitivity Map in the 2035 La Quinta General Plan (LQGP), designates the project site in Lake Cahuilla
Beds which has a "high" paleontological sensitivity. Lake Cahuilla Beds occur in areas where ancient Lake
Cahuilla covered the Valley floor. Lakebed sediments have yielded freshwater diatoms, plants, sponges,
mollusks, and fish as well as small animals. Although the lakebed soils are less than 10,000 years old,
they hold potentially significant information on the area's early ecological history and have a high
potential for paleontological resources.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-6 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Project Site
Terrain
The terrain in most of the project area is relatively level due to past agricultural operations, with the
exception of the portion in and around Coral Mountain. The northeastern portion does not appear to
have been farmed. The terrain in this area is somewhat uneven. On the western edge, the land remains
in a native creosote bush scrub state. A large amount of tufa has formed on the boulders and rocks at
the base of Coral Mountain during the various stands of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Vegetation on the
property includes creosote bush, mesquite, palo verde, brittlebush, saltbush, tumbleweed, and other
small desert shrubs and grasses (please also see Section 4.3, Biological Resources). Introduced
landscaping trees such as tamarisk, eucalyptus, cottonwood, and palms are found near the former
residences.
Soils
The site has been mapped to be immediately underlain by undifferentiated Quaternary -age lake deposits
(QI), alluvium (Qal), and Mesozoic granitic rocks (gr). Soils in the former agricultural fields consist of fine -
to medium -grained sands mixed with silt, clay, and freshwater shells. Beyond the agricultural fields, soils
in the westernmost portion of the project area feature fine- to coarse-grained sands with rocks,
boulders, and some freshwater shells. Fine-grained clay is exposed in some areas, especially near the
former shoreline of Holocene Lake Cahuilla, which occurred along the southwestern portion of the site,
adjacent to Coral Mountain.
Per Exhibit III -3 in the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the geologic
unit description of the project site largely consists of alluvial sand and clay (QI/Qa). The LQGP EIR
describes these soils as:
Interbedded lacustrine (clay of valley areas) (QI)
The region was the site of Ancient Lake Cahuilla, as well as other large lakes that inundated the Salton
Trough. These soils consist of lacustrine (lake) sediments up to 300 feet thick, layered with alluvial fan
and colluvial sediments deposited from mountain slopes.
Alluvial deposits (sand of valley areas) (Qa)
These soils are geologically young and near -surface, often containing organic debris, and have been
rapidly deposited by flash floods.
The subsurface soil conditions of the project property were analyzed by Sladden Engineering, Inc. during
an onsite field investigation. Per the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation, Sladden Engineering,
Inc. explored the subsurface conditions by completing ten exploratory boreholes throughout the site.
Four bores were completed in the area designated for Tourist Commercial land uses, and six were
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-7 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
completed in the area designated for Low Density Residential uses. A thin mantle of disturbed soil was
encountered to a depth of approximately one to two feet below existing grade in the area of the
exploratory bores. The disturbed soil consisted of silty sand (SM) and sandy silt (ML). Underlying the fill
soil and extending to the maximum depth explored (depths of approximately 51 feet below the existing
ground surface), native alluvium was encountered. Native materials consisted primarily of silty sand (SM)
and sandy silt (ML) with minor portions of clay (CL/CH). See Section 4.6.4, Methodology, of this Geology
and Soils Section for further discussion of the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation conducted at
the site.
Erosion
According to the La Quinta General Plan, erosion is influenced by factors such as climate, topography,
soil and rock types, and vegetation. The Coachella Valley is subject to infrequent but often powerful
storms that generate high rates of erosion from both rain and wind, especially in areas where the soil is
not stabilized by vegetation.
Particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter, classified as PM10, typically includes suspended
particles of dust, sand, metallic and mineral substances, road -surfacing materials, pollen, smoke, fumes,
and aerosols. Erosion, especially in the form of PM10, is a concern in the Coachella Valley because it
leads to sediment transport and re -deposition as well as health issues and property damage. Over time,
windblown sand and dust can damage building surfaces, roads, and infrastructure throughout the City
and region. Windborne and waterborne erosion can result in the displacement of topsoil, resulting in
soil scouring, as well as the placement of compressible or incompatible soils in developable areas. These
effects of soil erosion can impact structural foundations and require the implementation of additional
specialized grading techniques to ensure soils located at the site can support habitable structures and
infrastructure.
As previously stated, the geologic unit description of the project site largely consists of alluvial sand and
clay of valley areas (QI/Qa), per Exhibit 111-3 in the LQGP EIR. According to the LQGP EIR, alluvial deposits
(Qa) are highly susceptible to erosion, with moderate to high permeability.
Seismicity and Faulting
Faulting
There are no active faults mapped at the subject site, and the site is not located within a fault -rupture
hazard zone as defined by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Act.
Seismicity
No signs of active surface faulting were identified on-site and in the project vicinity, based on a review
of non -stereo digitized photographs of the project area. Since there are no active faults at the site, the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-8 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
potential for primary ground rupture is considered very low. The primary seismic hazard for the site is
ground shaking.
Secondary seismic hazards include liquefaction and earthquake -induced slope instability. However, no
signs of active surface faulting have occurred on-site and in the project vicinity, based on a review of
non -stereo digitized photographs of the project area (Appendix F).
The project is not located near any coastal areas; therefore, it is not prone to seismic -related tsunami
hazards. 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. Although the project is not
located in any mapped seiche zones, such as those associated with large bodies of water, the proposed
development will include a recreational Wave Basin feature. See Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality, for further analysis of secondary seismic hazards, such as tsunami and seiche, at the project site.
Paleontological Resources
At elevations ranging approximately from 50 feet above to 60 feet below mean sea level, the project
area would have been on the shoreline of Holocene Lake Cahuilla. This elevation places most of the
project area well within lakebed sediments. Fossils are commonly found within lacustrine sediments
associated with ancient Lake Cahuilla.
4.6,3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) was created in 1972 in the Clean Water
Act to address water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the
United States. The regulations provide that discharges of storm water to waters of the United States
from construction projects that encompass five or more acres of soil disturbance are effectively
prohibited unless the discharge is in compliance with an NPDES Permit. Regulations (Phase 11 Rule) that
became final on December 8, 1999, lowered the permitting threshold from five acres to one acre.
The NPDES Program has been delegated to the State of California for implementation through the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The SWRCB
administers the NPDES permit program regulating storm water for construction activities, known as the
General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance
Activities, also known as the Construction General Permit. The main compliance requirement of NPDES
permits is the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
for construction projects, addressing on-site pollutants and establishing appropriate storm water best
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-9 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
management practices (BMPs) during grading and construction as well as post -construction BMPs
(please see Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality).
State
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. A trace is a line on the earth's surface
defining a fault, and an active fault is defined as one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years. The
minimum distance a structure for human occupancy can be placed from an active fault is generally fifty
feet.
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.
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 site as applications within planning areas are submitted.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-10 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Regional and Local
South Coast Air Quality Management District
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMP) is the regulatory agency responsible for
improving air quality for Orange County and portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside
counties, including the Coachella Valley. SCAQMD is responsible for controlling emissions primarily from
stationary sources of air pollution, including grading and construction sites. The main source of pollution
from grading and construction activities is fugitive dust, which is particulate matter that is suspended in
the air by direct or indirect human activities. Two South Coast AQMD rules were adopted with the
purpose of reducing the amount of fugitive dust entrained as a result of human activities. Rule 403
applies to any activity capable of generating fugitive dust. Rule 403.1 is supplemental to Rule 403 and
applies only to fugitive dust sources in Coachella Valley.
Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust
Rule 403 requires the implementation of best available dust control measures (BACM) during active
operations capable of generating fugitive dust. This rule also requires activities defined as "large
operations" to notify the South Coast AQMD by submitting specific forms. A large operation is defined
as any active operation on property containing 50 or more acres of disturbed surface area; or any earth
moving operation with a daily earth -moving or throughput volume of 5,000 cubic yards, three times
during the most recent 365 day period. The project will be subject to Rule 403.
Rule 403.1— Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources
Rule 403.1 is a supplemental rule to Rule 403 and is applicable to man-made sources of fugitive dust in
the Coachella Valley. The purpose of this rule is to reduce fugitive dust and resulting PM10 emissions
from man-made sources. Rule 403.1 requires a Fugitive Dust Control Plan approved by South Coast
AQMD or an authorized local government agency prior to initiating any construction/ earth -moving
activity. These requirements are applicable to construction projects with 5,000 or more square feet of
surface area disturbance. The project will be subject to Rule 403.1.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-11 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan
Adopted on February 19, 2013, and amended on November 19, 2013, the City of La Quinta 2035 General
Plan Soils and Geology Element 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.
4.6.4 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 future projects with the Coral Mountain Resort project site would
have a significant effect on soils and geology if it is determined that the project will:
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 in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of
the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, 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?
Threshold topic "e", involving septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, is not analyzed in
great detail since screening criterion related to septic systems concluded that there would be no impacts.
See Chapter 6.0 for a complete discussion.
Methodology
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-12 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Geotechnical Investigation
A Geotechnical Investigation was prepared for the approximately 386 -acre project site by Sladden
Engineering, in February 2019. The purpose of the Geotechnical Investigation is to explore the subsurface
conditions at the site to provide recommendations for foundation design and site preparation relative to
the development of the project. Sladden conducted a field exploration program, laboratory testing, and
engineering analyses. Specifically, the site characterizations consisted of the following tasks:
• Site reconnaissance to assess the existing surface conditions on and adjacent to the site.
• Drilling ten (10) exploratory boreholes to depths between approximately 21 and 51 feet bgs in
order to characterize the subsurface soil conditions. Representative samples of the soil were
classified in the field and retained for laboratory testing and engineering analyses.
• Digging five exploratory trenches to depths of approximately five feet bgs in order to evaluate the
subsurface conditions along previously identified vegetation linaments.
• The performance of laboratory testing on selected samples to evaluate their engineering
characteristics.
• The review of available geologic literature and the discussion of potential geologic hazards.
• The review of various geotechnical reports previously prepared for the project site.
• The performance of engineering analyses to develop recommendations for foundation design and
site preparation.
Additional conclusions and determinations provided in this Geology and Soils Section were derived from
state resources and public agency (County and City) documentation. Agency maps illustrating regional
and local fault lines and zones, susceptibility to liquefaction, areas susceptible to rockfalls and landslides,
and areas of paleontological sensitivity were consulted to analyze the potential impacts of geology and
soils present at the project site.
Paleontological Resources Assessment
A project -specific Paleontological Resources Assessment (referred to as "Paleontological Report" herein)
was provided by CRM Tech in October 2019 (Appendix H). The Paleontological Report was conducted to
determine whether the proposed project would adversely affect any significant, nonrenewable
paleontological resources, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In order to
identify any paleontological resource localities that may exist in or near the project area and to assess
the probability for such resources, CRM Tech initiated records searches at the appropriate repositories,
conducted a literature review, and carried out a systematic field survey of the project area. The methods
and results of the project's cultural resources reports are provided below.
• Records searches to the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) in Redlands and the Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC) in Los Angeles to identify previously
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-13 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
completed paleontological resource studies as well as known paleontological localities within a
one -mile radius of the project area.
o The NHMLAC replied on July 17, 2019, stating that no previously discovered
paleontological localities are located within the project area; however, the NHMLAC
identified nearby localities from sediment lithologies similar to those present both on the
surface and at depth in the project area.
o The SBCM did not provide the requested data. As a result, past records search results
from the SBCM on other properties nearby were consulted for pertinent information. Past
records searches from the SBCM reported similar findings to the NHMLAC, stating that
the geologic units within the project area had produced fossil localities in the surrounding
region.
• Records search at the Riverside County Land Information System for information on the County's
overall paleontological sensitivity assessment of the project location.
• Literature review of the project site, including primarily topographic, geologic, and soil maps of
the Coachella Valley region, published geologic literature pertaining to the project location, and
other materials in the CRM Tech library, including unpublished reports produced during similar
surveys in the vicinity.
• Field survey of the project area carried out on August 6-9, 2019. The survey was completed on
foot by walking a series of parallel transects oriented north -south or east -west and spaced 15
meters (approximately 50 feet) apart. Ground visibility ranged from poor (5-10 percent) in areas
of dense vegetation, such as in the northeast corner of the property, to excellent (90 percent) in
most of the other areas.
o The field survey of the project area encountered no surface manifestation of any
vertebrate fossil remains.
The Riverside County paleontological sensitivity map classifies the project location as High Potential
(High Sensitivity A) in the northeastern half, Undetermined Potential in much of the southwestern half,
and Low Potential in the exposed igneous outcrops in the southwestern corner.
• High Sensitivity A is defined as "sedimentary rock units with high potential for containing
significant non-renewable paleontological resources... based on geologic formations or mapped
rock units that are known to contain or have the correct age and depositional conditions to
contain significant paleontological resources. These include rocks of Silurian or Devonian age and
younger that have potential to contain remains of fossil fish, and Mesozoic and Cenozoic rocks
that contain fossilized body elements and trace fossils such as tracks, nests and eggs".
• Undetermined Potential is defined as areas underlain by sedimentary units for which insufficient
literature is available to make a determination of paleontological sensitivity.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-14 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
• 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 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".
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
Based on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist, the
closest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone to the project site is the San Andreas Fault, approximately
7.75 miles northeast of the subject property. The project site is not located on an active fault or within
an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
According to the Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix F), no signs of active surface fault rupture or
secondary seismic effects (lateral spreading, lurching, etc.) were identified on-site during the field
investigation.
There are no known active faults near or at the project site, and the project is not located in an Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, there will be no impact associated with fault rupture on-site.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking
Regional faults, including the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones, have the potential to generate
moderate to severe ground shaking in the planning area. Factors that determine the effect of ground
motion and the degree of structural damage that may occur include intensity of the earthquake, distance
between epicenter and site, soil and bedrock composition, depth to groundwater, presence of ridge
tops, and building design and other criteria (La Quinta General Plan).
The project site is located approximately 7.75 miles southwest of the closest active fault zone, the San
Andreas Fault. The Geotechnical Investigation states that due to the multiple active faults in the project's
vicinity, the site has been subjected to past ground shaking, and strong seismic shaking is expected
during the design life of the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-15 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The proposed development will be constructed in a manner that reduces the risk of seismic hazards (Title
24, California Code of Regulations). According to Geotechnical Investigation and the 2016 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 project shall comply with the most current seismic design coefficients and ground motion
parameters and all applicable provisions of the CBC, specifically Chapter 16 of the CBC, Structural Design,
Section 1613, Earthquake Loads, as well as City Municipal Code Section 8.02.010. Section 8.02.010
adopts the 2019 California Building Code for regulating the construction, alteration, movement,
enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and
demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings
or structures.
Site work will be conducted in accordance with the project -specific geotechnical and soils analyses
required with the submittal of grading and building plans. Foundation and structural design of the
proposed project would reduce exposure of people or structures to adverse effects to the greatest
extent possible. Sladden Engineering recommends that remedial grading within the proposed new
building areas include the removal and re -compaction of any loose surface soil. The removal of onsite
loose surface soil will ensure that the presence of potentially compressible and expansive near -surface
native soil and potential seismic settlements do not occur at the project site. Additionally, stripping areas
of vegetation, associated root systems, and debris, over -excavating and re -compacting throughout
building and foundation areas are recommended in order to remove soils and materials that are
incompatible for development or materials with insufficient load-bearing capacity to support the onsite
structures. With the implementation of appropriate building codes and recommendations provided in
the project -specific geotechnical and soils analyses, impacts related to strong seismic shaking at the
project site would be less than significant.
Dike No. 2 and Dike No. 4 are flood control facilities under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and maintained by CVWD. The dikes are located
west and upgradient from the project. Due to the levees' proximity to the proposed site, the project
does not occur in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), where the risk of inundation is considered to be
higher. These dikes are maintained by CVWD as part of their 590 -square mile flood protection coverage
area. CVWD develops the dikes within their jurisdiction to comply with current building codes and
standards in order to withstand the effects of strong seismic shaking, which assures less than significant
impacts associated with inundation.
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking of relatively long duration and intensity over 0.2 g occurs in
areas of loose, unconsolidated soils with relatively shallow groundwater depths (50 feet or less). The
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-16 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
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. Structures may sink or tilt as bearing capacity decreases, causing substantial damage. Other
effects of liquefied soils include a loss of bearing strength, ground oscillations, lateral spreading, and
ground lurching and slumping (La Quinta General Plan).
The Seismic Hazards Map (Exhibit IV -3), in the La Quinta General Plan, indicates that the southeastern
portion of the City are highly and moderately susceptible to liquefaction. This is due to the shallow
groundwater (between 30 to 50 feet below the ground surface) and the youthful, unconsolidated
sediments found in that area. The site is shown to be moderately susceptible to liquefaction in this
Exhibit.
In order to assess the subsurface conditions, Sladden Engineering conducted a field investigation by
drilling ten exploratory boreholes onsite. Groundwater was encountered at depths of approximately 47
feet below existing grade at two locations (BH -2 and BH -6). The investigation determined that a high
groundwater depth of 20 feet or more below the existing grade may occur in the future due to adjacent
ongoing groundwater recharge activities immediately south of the site. Therefore, there is potential for
liquefaction to occur at the project site.
The proposed development will include a recreational Wave feature. Although groundwater was found
at approximately 47 feet below grade, future groundwater may occur at 20 feet or more below grade,
and on-site water bodies, including lakes and the Wave feature, could encroach to a depth of 15-18 feet.
All on-site water bodies will be lined, and slopes and shores will be stabilized to state and local standards
and under the instruction of a structural engineer, to ensure liquefaction or infiltration will not occur at
the Wave and water bodies onsite. The wave design will incorporate the necessary structural concrete
design features to handle the pressure and drainage associated with the wave generation. This is
identified as Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Through this design, water intrusion generated by seismic
events will be properly mitigated and contained to prevent liquefaction.
Since the project is potentially susceptible to liquefaction, the project site will be required to comply
with the site preparation and foundation recommendations listed in the project -specific Geotechnical
Investigation in order to ensure project safety. The Geotechnical Investigation recommends that
remedial grading within the proposed new building areas include the removal and re -compaction of any
loose surface soil. Additionally, stripping areas of vegetation, associated root systems, and debris, over -
excavating and re -compacting throughout building and foundation areas are recommended. The
recommended activities would ensure that the soil is absent of debris, organic material, and loose
surface soil and compacted to provide firm and uniform foundation bearing conditions. The
recommendations provided by the Geotechnical Investigation are provided in Mitigation Measure GEO-
2. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2, and State building standards,
impacts of seismic related ground failure at the project will be reduced to less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-17 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
iv. Landslides
The project site is located on the southwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58. Coral Mountain,
an elevated topographic feature defines the project property's southwest boundary. Due to the project's
proximity to Coral Mountain, the Seismic Hazard Map (Exhibit IV -3) in the 2035 La Quinta General Plan
(LQGP) shows that the project lies immediately adjacent to an area with a very high and high possibility
for earthquake induced slope instability and potential for soil block slides, soil slumps and rock falls.
The project does not propose development near the foot of the mountain. Therefore, the Geotechnical
Investigation concluded that risks associated with slope instability should not be a controlling factor in
project design. The land use areas adjacent to Coral Mountain will be preserved for open space and
recreational uses within Planning Area IV and Planning Area III (specifically Planning Areas III -B and III -G
in the tourist commercial land use) The closest proposed habitable structure to Coral Mountain lies
approximately 170 feet from the toe of slope, located in the proposed Low Density Residential land use
designation. The open space recreation area near Coral Mountain will accommodate low -impact active
and passive recreation activities such as hiking trails. The tourist commercial use adjacent to Coral
Mountain will include the Wave Basin, as well as open areas that will be used as gathering spaces and
staging spaces using temporary facilities such as shade structures, tenting for inclement weather, and
catering equipment. There will be a 25 -foot setback between Coral Mountain and the proposed
recreational facilities. No activity will occur in the 25 -foot setback, therefore, reducing potential impacts
of seismically induced landslides and rockfalls on habitable structures and people.
The slopes for the wave and proposed lakes will not be greater than 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical), or
greater than 30 feet. The slopes for the onsite water bodies will be designed to City standards. As stated
in discussion a) iii), all lakes and water bodies will be lined, and slopes and shores will be stabilized to
state and local standards and under the instruction of a structural engineer. This will ensure slope
stability at the onsite water bodies. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of top soil
The project property is located on approximately 386 acres of vacant land, on the southwest corner of
Madison Street and Avenue 58 in the City of La Quinta. The project proposes a mixed-use development
community composed of low-density residential units, commercial uses, a hotel/resort component and
recreational and open space uses. Development of the project will also include associated improvements
such as paved roadways, landscaped features and pedestrian walkways. The Wind Erosion Susceptibility
Map (Exhibit IV -5) in the 2035 La Quinta General Plan specifies that the project site is located in an area
with a high and very high Wind Erodibility Rating.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-18 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Windborne Erosion
The project site is currently vacant with scattered, low-lying vegetation, comprised of Sonoran creosote
brush. The construction of this project will involve ground disturbing activities, such as the clearing and
grubbing of existing vegetation, and grading of the property. These activities will increase the potential
of soil erosion at the time of development. In order to reduce the effect of windborne erosion at the
project site, the project shall be required to implement the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation
Plan (PM10 Plan) requirement for a Fugitive Dust Control Plan. The purpose of this plan is to reduce the
amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic fugitive dust
sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. The Fugitive Dust
Control Plan requires the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) such as the use of
perimeter fencing, applying adhesive dust suppressant, or watering the project site. The project property
shall implement the BMPs for on- and off-site improvements outlined within their project -specific PM10
Plan during construction of the project site. Additionally, each phase of construction will develop BMPs
to protect previous phase occupants. Refer to the Air Quality section of this environmental document
for further information on the Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
Waterborne Erosion
In addition to windborne erosion, the project property will be subject to waterborne erosion during
project construction and operation. Waterborne erosion can be caused by both human activities, such as
over -watering a site, and natural conditions, such as stormwater runoff from a rain event. Manmade
drainage facilities do not currently exist on the project property. Onsite stormwater runoff typically
follows existing natural flows (west to east), and then percolates into the site soils since there is no
overflow for stormwater to leave the property. The project site is protected from offsite mountain flows
from the south and west by the existing levees and from the north by existing development. The project
will be constructed in phases, and within each phase, as a standard operating procedure, it is expected
that no more than 5 acres will be disturbed per day. This approximately 5 -acre per day disturbance is due
to the unique Desert construction logistics that includes pre -watering of the area to be graded for at least
one week prior to moving dirt. This process ensures adequate soil saturation in order to achieve the
necessary compaction for the building pads. Pre -watering activities are achieved by establishing
"temporary" irrigation (via sprinklers, well, and pump systems) to raise the moisture content of the
site. Approximately 20 acres of land can be physically watered at one time on a temporary basis,
establishing approximately 5 working days for grading, before the sprinkles are moved. The project is
required to 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 required plan will identify the locations and types of construction activities requiring
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-19 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
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:
• 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.
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to implement a SWPPP must be submitted to the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) who will issue a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number. The SWPPP and WDID
must be kept on site and used during the life of the project. The implementation of a SWPPP for individual
developments within the project site would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil
during construction. This issue is discussed further in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.
As stated above, project implementation will include landscaping, buildings, and paved areas throughout
the property. During operation of the project, landscaped areas, which would include ground coverings,
trees, and grass, will stabilize the ground surface. Irrigation systems (i.e., sprinklers or drip irrigation)
would also be maintained during project operation to ensure that overwatering of plants (which leads to
waterborne erosion) does not occur. Drainage and retention facilities would also be maintained during
project operation to ensure their intended function. The required routine maintenance of the onsite
drainage and retention facilities and associated infrastructure would reduce the likelihood of flooding on
the property. Additionally, the project would introduce impervious, paved areas throughout the property.
The impervious surfaces would reduce the potential for erosion during operation by stabilizing the ground
surface and minimizing the amount of exposed soil. A project -specific Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) has been prepared to ensure that the project implements adequate storm water conveyances
and treatment throughout the site. The WQMP includes guidelines for facility maintenance, pool water
discharge, and other operations aimed at complying with local surface water quality requirements. The
WQMP incorporates grading, hydrology, and other plans to document the site design, source controls,
and treatment controls with a required operation and maintenance program to comply with water quality
objectives (see Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, for further discussion). Such WQMP BMP
protocol applicable to the project would include the following:
• Education for Property Owners, Operators, Tenants, Occupants, or Employees;
• Activity Restrictions;
• Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance;
• Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots; and,
• Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-20 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
A WQMP must also include Structural Source Control BMPs specific towards landscape and irrigation
system design, signage and protection of slopes and channels. These features, included in the project -
specific WQMP, will establish stabilized surfaces and onsite maintenance programs at the project site,
thereby decreasing the likelihood of onsite windborne and waterborne erosion during project operation.
The implementation of the Fugitive Dust Control Plan, the SWPPP, and WQMP (outlined above, and
further discussed in the Air Quality and Hydrology and Water Quality Sections of this document) will
ensure that impacts from erosion created from the project site will be less than significant.
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
During the field investigation, a thin mantle of disturbed soil was encountered to a depth of
approximately one to two feet below existing grade in the area of the bores. The disturbed soil consisted
of silty sand (SM) and sandy silt (ML). Underlying the fill soil and extending to the maximum depth
explored, native alluvium was encountered. Native materials consisted primarily of silty sand (SM) and
sandy silt (ML) with minor portions of clay (CL/CH).
Liquefaction
As discussed previously, in section a) iii., liquefaction occurs when ground shaking of relatively long
duration and intensity causes loose, unconsolidated soils to act like a liquid and lose strength. The project
site is located in an area susceptible to liquefaction due to the historically shallow groundwater. Sladden
Engineering encountered groundwater at depths of approximately 47 feet below existing grade and
anticipates a groundwater depth of 20 feet or more below the existing grade associated with future
CVWD groundwater water recharge activities. The potential for liquefaction, and subsequent effects
(i.e., lateral spread), is likely to occur at the project site in the event of strong seismic ground shaking
over an extended duration. Development within the project site will be conditioned to comply with the
current California Building Code (CBC) standards, City requirements, and mitigation measures outlined
in discussion a) iii. to ensure effects of liquefaction and lateral spread are less than significant. As stated
in discussion a. iii) and Mitigation Measure GEO-1, all designs for any water body on the site shall be
prepared by a qualified engineer and comply with all seismic codes in effect at the time they are
constructed. All designs shall be based on, and incorporate the recommendation of a qualified soils
engineer in a site and water body specific report attached to the plans submitted to the City.
Landslides and Rockfalls
The City of La Quinta, in Exhibit IV -3 of the LQGP, designates the project site to be located adjacent to
an area susceptible to rockfalls, soil block slides and soil slumps. Recreational and open space uses are
proposed in the adjacent area near the slopes of Coral Mountain. The proposed residential and resort
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-21 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
components will not be located immediately adjacent to the mountain; therefore, these permanent and
habitable structures are not anticipated to be impacted by landslides and rockfalls. The project proposes
special events up to four times a year. During the special events, temporary facilities such as shade
structures, tenting for inclement weather, and catering equipment may be located south of the proposed
Wave basin. A 25 -foot setback will separate the proposed recreational facilities and temporary uses from
the slopes of Coral Mountain. Activities will not occur within this 25 -foot separation, therefore, impacts
of landslides and rockfalls would be reduced. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Ground Subsidence
As a part of the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation, Sladden Engineering reviewed previous
studies conducted for the existing Andalusia development, located east of the project site. The previous
studies evaluated existing distress to structures, roadways and improvements within the existing
development in order to evaluate the potential for subsidence to affect current and future development.
The previous studies did not find evidence of observed distress that could be directly attributed to
subsidence. The evaluation performed as a part of the Geotechnical Investigation indicated that the
surface contours do not appear to be the result of subsidence.
The CVWD service area encompasses approximately 640,000 acres, providing water supply to the City
of La Quinta. The United Stated Geological Survey (USGS), with CVWD, completed subsidence monitoring
reports for the Coachella Valley in 2001 and 2007. 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. CVWD's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) focused on regional water use and measures to reduce overdraft. In order to reduce overdraft,
CVWD stresses the importance of water conservation, the use of additional water sources, source
substitution, and groundwater recharge. Additionally, to manage groundwater, CVWD will continue to
convert larger water consumers (i.e., golf courses) to non -potable Canal water and recyciced water,
where feasible. When this is achieved, the risk of subsidence is reduced or eliminated. The strategies
evaluated for the 2015 UWMP achieve a reasonable balance between the benefits of overdraft
reduction, water level increases and impacts resulting from those increases.
In the East Coachella Valley, the development of the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment (Levy)
Facility was completed in 2009, Water levels are beginning to increase in the confined aquifer in the East
Valley partly as a result of the increased hydraulic pressure provided by the Levy Facility. CVWD has
implemented a variety of measures, such as groundwater recharge, imported water, and water
conservation techniques and programs to minimize the extraction of groundwater. (See Section 4.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR).
Water to be consumed by the project was analyzed in the project specific Water Supply
Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV). The analysis of water resources and water supply is
based upon the understanding of projected water supplies as developed by CVWD and used the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-22 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
WSA/WSV prepared and adopted for the project, including estimates of available groundwater, Colorado
River water, and SWP sources. The project would have an increased water demand of 958.63 -acre feet
per year (AFY), which will be supplied to the site through CVWD's regional water system. Project
domestic water supplies and associated landscape irrigation supplies will be provided from groundwater
from the Indio Subbasin in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin via CVWD's potable water
distribution system. Potable water will be provided to the site by constructing an 18 -inch and 12 -inch
water main to connect to an existing 18 -inch diameter domestic water pipeline on Avenue 58 and a 24 -
inch water pipeline on Madison Street. Additionally, a water well will be developed to supplement
CVWD's supplies and will be part of the Lake Cahuilla (145) pressure zone. CVWD would provide
approximately 958.63 AFY per year for the proposed project from a number of wells in its system, not
only the well located on the project site, to assure an even drawdown of water in the basin. No excessive
withdrawal of water is anticipated at the site, therefore, the potential for subsidence is considered low
and impacts would be less than significant.
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. As previously stated, the soils at the project site includes Interbedded
Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits (QI/Qa), per the LQGP EIR. Due to the saturation of deeper sediments
by the ancient lakes, the collapse potential of those sediments below the youngest alluvium is low.
Although soils susceptible to collapse do not occur at the project site, the project is required to remove
debris, vegetation, undocumented fill soil, and loose soil from the existing soil, and compact the soil
using controlled compacted fill, as provided in Mitigation Measure GEO-2. The implementation of this
mitigation measure will assure that impacts associated with soil collapse remain less than significant.
Conclusion
Grading plans and structural engineering plans will be reviewed and approved by the City. The project
will be conditioned to comply with the current California Building Code (CBC) standards, City
requirements, and recommendations stated within the project specific Geotechnical Investigation to
reduce the impacts of potentially unstable soils. The recommendations provided in the Geotechnical
Investigation are included in Mitigation Measure GEO-2, which requires the project to remove debris,
vegetation, undocumented fill soil, and loose soil from the existing soil, and compacted using controlled
compacted fill. The subgrade and all fill material shall all be compacted with acceptable compaction
equipment. Additionally, all designs for any water body on the site shall be prepared by a qualified
engineer and comply with all seismic codes in effect at the time they are constructed. This is indicated
as Mitigation Measure GEO-1. The implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 and GEO-2 prior to
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-23 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
and during project grading and construction would ensure that foundation bearing conditions are firm
and uniform, therefore, reducing impacts of collapse, lateral spreading, and liquefaction to less than
significant levels.
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-8 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 Investigation contains an Expansion Index test of select samples on the project site to
evaluate expansive potential of the materials underlying the property. Based on the laboratory testing,
the materials underlying the site are considered to have "very low" to "medium" expansion potential for
the sandy and silty soil layers, respectively. Minor areas of clay were also found onsite. Since significant
grading is expected at the project site, the expansion potential should be re-evaluated after grading. Per
the geotechnical analysis, recommendations regarding foundation design, such as the removal and re -
compaction of any loose subsurface soil, should be carried out through construction. If imported fill is
required, the material should be of a non -expansive nature and should meet the criteria outlined within
the Geotechnical Investigation. The project shall comply with the recommendations established within
the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation to ensure the foundational safety of the project site. The
recommendations established in the Geotechnical Investigation are contained in Mitigation Measure
GEO-2. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, the impact will be less than significant.
f
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature
CRM Tech prepared a project -specific Paleontological Report (Appendix H) on October 29, 2019 on the
currently vacant property. The paleontological report was designed to identify any significant, non-
renewable paleontological resources that may exist within or adjacent to the project area, and to assess
the possibility for such resources to be encountered in future excavation and construction activities. In
order to identify any paleontological resource localities that may exist in or near the project area and to
assess the probability for such resources to be encountered during the project, CRM Tech initiated
records searches at the appropriate repositories, conducted a literature review and carried out a
systematic field survey of the project area. Findings from the research procedures indicate that the
project's potential to impact significant paleontological resources appears to be low in the igneous rock
formation of Coral Mountain, and in the previously disturbed surface soils in the rest of the project area.
However, the undisturbed subsurface lakebed sediments from Holocene Lake Cahuilla are considered to
be of high paleontological sensitivity.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-24 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
In addition to the records searches and literature reviews, CRM Tech also completed a field survey from
August 6, 2019 to August 9, 2019 of the project area. The field survey of the project area encountered
no surface manifestation of any vertebrate fossil remains. The surface soils contained freshwater shells,
especially in the former agricultural fields. The presence of these molluscan remains provides additional
evidence that the sediments of the project area can be attributed to the Lake Cahuilla lakebed sequence.
Fine-grained clay was observed in some areas, especially near the former Lakeshore, which is located in
the southwest portion of the project site.
Shallow excavations in the uppermost layers of surface soils are unlikely to uncover significant vertebrate
fossils, but deeper excavations extending into the Lake Cahuilla bed deposits may well encounter
significant fossil vertebrate remains. Therefore, deeper excavation activities, including the excavation of
the Wave Basin and onsite lakes and retention basins, may significantly impact paleontological
resources.
In order to reduce impacts to paleontological resources encountered at depth on the project site,
Mitigation Measure GEO-3 is provided below. As described in GEO-3, all earthmoving operations
reaching beyond the depth of two feet shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor and
continuous monitoring will become necessary if undisturbed, potentially fossiliferous lakebed sediments
are encountered. With implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts associated with fossils on
the project site will be less than significant.
4.6.6 Cumulative Impacts
Potential cumulative impacts on geology and soils could result from projects that combine to create
geologic hazards, including unstable geologic conditions. However, most geology and soil hazards
associated with development projects in the surrounding area would be site specific. Nonetheless,
cumulative growth in the project area would expose a greater number of people of seismic and geologic
hazards. However, these can be mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures in the form
of CBC compliance and recommendations outlined in a project -specific geotechnical investigation during
grading and construction will address geotechnical hazards associated with seismic ground shaking,
ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence, loss of topsoil, and expansive or corrosive soils, and will apply to
all future development in the City. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would ensure that all designs for any water
body on the site will be prepared by a qualified engineer and comply with all seismic codes in effect at
the time they are constructed. Mitigation Measure GEO-2 would ensure that the project adheres to the
recommendations provided in the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation. Finally, Mitigation
Measure GEO-3 requires the presence of a qualified paleontological monitor onsite during earth -moving
operations reaching beyond the depth of two feet. With implementation of the foregoing Mitigation
Measures as well as implementation of project -specific PM10 Plans, SWPPPs, and WQMP, development
within the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will not cause or contribute to any cumulative impacts
associated with geology and soils, and are thus considered to be less than significant. Additionally, all
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-25 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
future projects in the region would be subject to established guidelines and regulations pertaining to
building design and seismic safety, including those set forth in the California Building Code. Therefore,
project impacts would not be cumulative considerable.
4.6.6 Mitigation Measures
GEO-1 All designs for any water body on the site shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and comply
with all seismic codes in effect at the time they are constructed. All designs shall be based on
and incorporate the recommendation of a qualified soils engineer in a site and water body
specific report attached to the plans submitted to the City.
GEO-2 All earthwork including excavation, backfill and preparation of the subgrade soil, shall be
performed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations, presented below, and
portions of the local regulatory requirements, as applicable. All earthwork should be
performed under the observation and testing of a qualified soil engineer. The following
geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed project are based on
observations from the field investigation program, laboratory testing and geotechnical
engineering analyses.
• Stripping: areas to be graded shall be cleared of the vegetation, associated root systems
and debris. All areas scheduled to receive fill should be cleared of old fills and any
irreducible matter. The stripping shall be removed off -sit or stockpiled for later use in
landscape areas. Undocumented fill soil or loose soil shall be removed in its entirety and
replaced as engineered fill. Voids left by obstruction shall be properly backfilled in
accordance with the compaction recommendations of this report.
• Preparation of the Residential Building Areas: in order to provide firm and uniform
foundation bearing conditions, the primary foundation bearing soil shall be over -
excavated and recompacted. Over -excavation shall extend to a minimum depth of 3 feet
below existing grade or 3 feet blow the bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper. Once
adequate removals have been verified, the exposed native soil shall be scarified, the
moisture -conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
• Preparation of the Hotel Building: In order to provide firm and uniform foundation
bearing conditions, over -excavation and re -compaction through the building and
foundation area shall be required as recommended by the Project Soils engineer and as
directed by the City. All artificial fill soil and low density near surface native soil shall be
removed to a depth of at least 4 feet below existing grade or 4 feet below the bottom of
the footings, whichever is greater. Remedial grading shall extend laterally, a minimum of
five feet beyond the building perimeter. The exposed surface shall then be scarified, the
moisture conditioned to within two percent of optimum moisture content and compacted
to at least 90 percent relative compaction.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-26 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
• Compaction: Soil to be used as engineered fill should be free of organic material, debris
and other deleterious substances, and shall not contain irreducible matter greater than
six (6) inches in maximum dimension. All fill materials shall be placed in thin lifts not
exceeding six inches in a loose condition. If import fill is required, the material shall be of
a non -expansive nature and shall meet the following criteria:
Plastic Index
Less than 12
Liquid Limit
Less than 35
Percent Soil Passing #200 Sieve
Between 15% and 35%
Maximum Aggregate Size
3 Inches
The subgrade and all fill material shall be compacted with acceptable compaction
equipment, to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The bottom of the exposed
subgrade shall be observed by a representative of Sladden Engineering prior to fill
placement. Compaction testing shall be performed on all lifts in order to verify proper
placement of the fill materials.
• Shrinkage and Subsidence: Volumetric shrinkage of the material that is excavated and
replaced as controlled compacted fill shall be anticipated. It is estimated that shrinkage
could vary from 10 percent to 25 percent. Subsidence of the surfaces that are scarified
and compacted shall be between 1 and 3 tenths of a foot. This will vary depending upon
the type of equipment used, the moisture content of the soil at the time of grading and
the actual degree of compaction attained.
GEO-3 All earth -moving operations reaching beyond the depth of two feet shall be monitored by a
qualified paleontological monitor and continuous monitoring will become necessary if
undisturbed, potentially fossiliferous lakebed sediments are encountered. The monitor shall
be empowered to stop earth moving activities if fossils are identified. The monitor shall be
prepared to quickly salvage fossils, but must have the power to temporarily halt or divert
construction equipment to allow for removal of abundant or large specimens. A monitoring
plan shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any earth moving permit, or the
disturbance of any soils on the site, which will include:
• Samples of sediments shall be collected and processed to recover small fossil remains.
• Recovered specimens shall be identified and curated at a repository with permanent
retrievable storage that would allow for further research in the future.
A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered specimens and a discussion
of their significance when appropriate, shall be prepared upon completion of the research
procedures outlined above. The report shall be provided to the City within 30 days of the
conclusion of monitoring activities.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-27 June 2021
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.6.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-3, 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
Investigation Report as well as the latest UBC and CBC as required by the City Engineer. Responsible
parties include each project's geotechnical consultant and the City Engineer or his/her designee.
4.6.8 Resources
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 Investigation Andalusia West Side Development, La Quinta, California, Sladden
Engineering, February 2019.
5. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report, Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech, October
2019.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.6-28 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4,7.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to discuss the existing greenhouse gas (GHG) conditions pertinent to the
Coachella Valley and analyze the potential impacts, in terms of GHG emissions, resulting from
construction and operation of the project. The GHG principles, descriptions and supporting analysis rely
on the relevant background research and information made available in various public regulatory and
reference documents cited throughout this section. Reference documentation includes sections of the
Federal Clean Air Act (CWA); Final 2016Air 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; Analysis of the Coachella Valley PM10 Redesignation Request
and Maintenance Plan, by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), February 2010; and sections of the
SCAQMD Rule Book; and California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017, Trends of Emissions and
Other Indicators, 2019 Edition, California Air Resources Board; 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 Coral Mountain
Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), completed by Urban Crossroads on November 12, 2020
and revised on March 1, 2021. The purpose of the GHGA was to evaluate project -related construction
and operational emissions and determine the level of GHG impacts as a result of constructing and
operating the proposed project. The GHGA methodology relied on CaIEEMod Version 2016.3.2 to
quantify GHG emissions associated with the project. As previously described in the Air Quality Section,
CaIEEMod 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, studies commissioned by California agencies such as the California Energy Commission
(CEC) and CalRecycle. The GHGA documentation referenced in this section is provided in the Appendices
of this Draft EIR (Appendix I). Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms, definitions, and
acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
4.7.2 Existing Conditions
GHG Fundamentals
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, preventing it from becoming too cold and
uninhabitable. Greenhouse gases include, but are not limited to, water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2),
methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), ozone (03), hydrofluorocarbons
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-1 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
(HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Carbon dioxide is the most abundant GHG.
Carbon dioxide reflects solar radiation back to Earth, thereby trapping solar energy and heat within the
lower atmosphere. Human activities (such as burning carbon -based fossil fuels) create water vapor and
CO2 as byproducts, thereby impacting the levels of GHG in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e) is a metric used to compare emissions of various greenhouse gases. It is the mass of carbon
dioxide that would produce the same estimated radiative forcing 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 anthropogenic activities. With respect to anthropogenic
activities, motor vehicle travel, air travel, consumption of fossil fuels for power generation, industrial
processes, heating and cooling, landfills, agriculture, and wildfire are the primary sources of GHG
emissions. The effects of GHG emissions and 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.
4.7,3 Regulatory Setting
State
California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)
In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Climate 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 that was to
be started in 2012. 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 and established the amount of 427 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) as the total statewide aggregated greenhouse gas 1990 emissions
level and 2020 emissions limit. 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 (S8 32)
Executive Order B-30-15 was issued by Governor Brown on April 29, 2015, establishing a new California
goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and ensuring the state
will continue its efforts to reduce carbon pollution. This 40% target was codified through Senate Bill 32
(2016), which 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-2 June 2021
4.7 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. 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. As stated in the Scoping
Plan, the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 GHG target include:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and
appliance standards;
• Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33%;
• Developing a California cap -and -trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative
partner programs to create a regional market system;
• Establishing targets for transportation related GHG emissions for regions throughout California
and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets;
• Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, including
California's clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the LCFS; and
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high GWP gases,
and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State's long-term commitment to AB 32
implementation.
CARB approved the First Scoping Plan Update on May 22, 2014. The First Scoping Plan Update identifies
the next steps for California's climate change strategy. The First Scoping Plan Update shows how
California continues on its path to meet the near-term 2020 GHG limit, but also sets a path toward long-
term, deep GHG emission reductions. The report establishes a broad framework for continued emission
reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The First Scoping Plan Update
identifies progress made to meet the near-term objectives of AB 32 and defines California's climate
change priorities and activities for the next several years. The First Scoping Plan Update does not set
new targets for the State but describes a path that would achieve the long term 2050 goal of Executive
Order S-3-05 for emissions to decline to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
Forecasting the amount of emissions that would occur in 2020 if no actions are taken was necessary to
assess the amount of reductions California must achieve to return to the 1990 emissions level by 2020
as required by AB 32. The no -action scenario is known as "business -as -usual" or BAU. CARB originally
defined the BAU scenario as emissions in the absence of any GHG emission reduction measures
discussed in the Scoping Plan.
As part of CEQA compliance for the Scoping Plan, CARB prepared a Supplemental Functional Equivalent
Document (FED) in 2011. The FED included an updated 2020 BAU emissions inventory projection based
on current economic forecasts (i.e., as influenced by the economic downturn) and emission reduction
measures already in place, replacing its prior 2020 BAU emissions inventory. CARB staff derived the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-3 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
updated emissions estimates by projecting emissions growth, by sector, from the state's average
emissions from 2006-2008. The new BAU estimate includes emission reductions for the million -solar -
roofs program, the AB 1493 motor vehicle GHG emission standards, and the LCFS. In addition, CARB
factored into the 2020 BAU inventory emissions reductions associated with 33% RPS for electricity
generation. The updated BAU estimate of 507 MMTCO2e by 2020 requires a reduction of 80 MMTCO2e,
or a 16% reduction below the estimated BAU levels to return to 1990 levels (i.e., 427 MMTCO2e) by
2020.
In order to provide a BAU reduction that is consistent with the original definition in the Scoping Plan and
with threshold definitions used in thresholds adopted by lead agencies for CEQA purposes and many
CAPs, the updated inventory without regulations was also included in the Supplemental FED. CARB 2020
BAU projection for GHG emissions in California was originally estimated to be 596 MMTCO2e. The
updated CARB 2020 BAU projection in the Supplemental FED is 545 MMTCO2e. Considering the updated
BAU estimate of 545 MMTCO2e by 2020, CARB estimates a 21.7% reduction below the estimated
statewide BAU levels is necessary to return to 1990 emission levels (i.e., 427 MMTCO2e) by 2020, instead
of the approximate 28.4% BAU reduction previously reported under the original Climate Change Scoping
Plan
2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update
In November 2017, CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, which identifies the State's post -2020
reduction strategy. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40% reduction below
1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Key programs that the proposed
Second Update builds upon include the Cap -and -Trade Regulation, the LCFS, and much cleaner cars,
trucks and freight movement, utilizing cleaner, renewable energy, and strategies to reduce CH4
emissions from agricultural and other wastes. 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.
California's climate strategy will require contributions from all sectors of the economy, including the land
base, and will include enhanced focus on zero- and near -zero -emission (ZE/NZE) vehicle technologies;
continued investment in renewables, including solar roofs, wind, and other distributed generation;
greater use of low carbon fuels; integrated land conservation and development strategies; coordinated
efforts to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (CH4, black carbon, and fluorinated gases);
and an increased focus on integrated land use planning to support livable, transit -connected
communities and conservation of agricultural and other lands. Requirements for direct GHG reductions
at refineries will further support air quality co -benefits in neighborhoods, including in disadvantaged
communities historically located adjacent to these large stationary sources, as well as efforts with
California's local air pollution control and air quality management districts (air districts) to tighten
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-4 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
emission limits on a broad spectrum of industrial sources. Scoping plan consistency analysis and findings
are provided in subsection b.
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) 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.
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 phase in during the 2009 through 2016 model years. When fully phased in, the near-term
(2009-2012) standards will 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. Several technologies stand out as
providing significant reductions in emissions at favorable costs. These include discrete variable valve lift
or camless valve actuation to optimize valve operation rather than relying on fixed valve timing and lift
as has historically been done; turbocharging to boost power and allow for engine downsizing; improved
multi -speed transmissions; and improved air conditioning systems that operate optimally, leak less,
and/or use an alternative refrigerant.
The second phase of the implementation for AB 1493 was incorporated into Amendments to the Low -
Emission Vehicle Program (LEV III) or the Advanced Clean Cars program. The Advanced Clean Car
program combines the control of smog -causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated
package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025. The regulation will reduce GHGs from
new cars by 34% from 2016 levels by 2025. The new rules will clean up gasoline and diesel -powered
cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero -emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars,
newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EV) and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The package will also
ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell
vehicles planned for deployment in California.
California GHG Emissions Inventory and Trends
California's annual statewide GHG emission inventory is an important tool for establishing historical
emission trends and tracking California's progress in reducing GHGs. In concert with data collected
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-5 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
through various California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) programs, the GHG inventory has been
considered critical in demonstrating the state's progress in achieving the statewide GHG target. The
inventory provides estimates of anthropogenic GHG emissions within California. CARB is responsible for
maintaining and updating California's GHG Inventory.
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 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 largest reductions are attributed to the electricity
sector, which continues to see decreases as a result of the state's climate policies. The transportation
sector remains the largest source of GHG emissions in the state, but saw a 1 percent increase in
emissions in 2017, the lowest growth rate over the previous 4 years.
On August 12, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced in a press release (No. 19-35) that
GHG emissions in California continued to fall ahead of schedule in 2017 as the state's economy grew
ahead of the national average, according to the California Air Resources Board's latest state inventory of
climate -changing emissions. The data also shows 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. The press release also included the following
highlights:
Electricity: Emissions from electricity generation made up about 15 percent of 2017 statewide
greenhouse gas emissions. In 2017, those emissions fell nine percent from 2016, the largest decline of
any economic sector. A large increase in zero -emission energy resources drove the reduction. Those
clean sources powered 52 percent of all California's electricity consumed in 2017.
Transportation: Vehicle tailpipe emissions accounted for 37 percent of California's 2017 GHG emissions.
Those emissions rose but showed signs of leveling off. The 2017 increase was 0.7 percent, down from
two percent the preceding year. Most of the greenhouse gas emissions increase came from passenger
vehicles.
Industry: Industrial emissions over multiple sectors showed a slight reduction or remained flat.
California's industrial sectors generated 21 percent of state GHGs in 2017. Oil & gas refineries and
hydrogen production were responsible for one-third of those emissions. The rest came mostly from oil
& gas extraction, cement plants, glass manufacturers and large food processors.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-6 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Regional and Local
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). The SCAQMD addresses the impacts to climate change of projects subject to SCAQMD permit
as a lead agency if they are the only agency having discretionary approval for the project and acts as a
responsible agency when a land use agency must also approve discretionary permits for the project. The
SCAQMD acts as an expert commenting agency for impacts to air quality. This expertise carries over to
GHG emissions, so the agency helps local land use agencies through the development of models and
emission thresholds that can be used to address GHG emissions.
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 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 SCAQMD Board has not approved the
thresholds; however, the Guidance Document provides substantial evidence supporting the approaches
to significance of GHG emissions that can be considered by the lead agency in adopting its own threshold.
The current interim thresholds consist of the following tiered approach:
• Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable
exemption under CEQA.
• Tier 2 consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan.
If a project is consistent with a qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it does not have
significant GHG emissions.
• Tier 3 consists of screening values, which the lead agency can choose, but must be
consistent with all projects within its jurisdiction. A project's construction emissions are
averaged over 30 years and are added to the project's operational emissions. If a project's
emissions are below one of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than
significant:
o Residential and Commercial land use: 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
o Industrial land use: 10,000 MTCO2e/yr
o Based on land use type: residential: 3,500 MTCO2e/yr; commercial: 1,400
MTCO2e/yr; or mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2e/yr
• Tier 4 has the following options:
o Option 1: Reduce Business -as -Usual (BAU) emissions by a certain percentage; this
percentage is currently undefined.
o Option 2: Early implementation of applicable AB 32 Scoping Plan measures
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-7 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
o Option 3: 2020 target for service populations (SP), which includes residents and
employees: 4.8 MTCO2e/SP per year for projects and 6.6 MTCO2e per SP per year
for plans;
o Option 3, 2035 target: 3.0 MTCO2e/SP per year for projects and 4.1 MTCO2e per
service population per year for plans
• Tier 5 involves mitigation offsets to achieve target significance threshold.
The SCAQMD's interim thresholds used the Executive Order S -3 -05 -year 2050 goal as the basis for the
Tier 3 screening level. Achieving the Executive Order's objective would contribute to worldwide efforts
to cap CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm, thus stabilizing global climate.
SCAQMD only has authority over GHG emissions from development projects that include air quality
permits. At this time, it is unknown if the project would include stationary sources of emissions subject
to SCAQMD permits. Notwithstanding, if the project requires a stationary permit, it would be subject to
the applicable SCAQMD regulations.
SCAQMD Regulation XXVII, adopted in 2009 includes the following rules:
• Rule 2700 defines terms and post GWPs.
• Rule 2701, SoCal Climate Solutions Exchange, establishes a voluntary program to
encourage, quantify, and certify voluntary, high quality certified GHG emission reductions
in the SCAQMD.
• Rule 2702, GHG Reduction Program created a program to produce GHG emission reductions
within the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD will fund projects through contracts in response to
requests for proposals or purchase reductions from other parties.
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,
then projected future year emissions based on 2005 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 was established in compliance with AB 32 and EO S-3-05, in order to
reduce the amount of GHG emissions produced in the City. Using AB 32 and EO S-3-05 as a guide, the
GHG Reduction Plan established policies and programs in order for the City to achieve the reduction
expectations. According to the GHG Reduction Plan, new development is required to adhere to the latest
building code standards, which assure energy efficiency and incorporate 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 recognizes that fuel efficiency
standards, land use efficiencies, and reducing overall VMTs will result in the reduction of GHGs. The City
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-8 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
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 from 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.
Emissions and emission reductions were calculated for both municipal activities and community wide
activities. The proposed project falls into the Community Wide Activities category. The baseline
inventory completed for the project includes GHG emissions from the use of energy for both the
residential and commercial sectors, fuel combustion from transportation, and the disposal of solid
waste associated with residents' and businesses' activities within the City of La Quinta. 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.
4.7.4 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
Coral Mountain Resort would have a significant effect on greenhouse gas emissions if it is determined
that the project 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.
Discussion on Establishment of Significance Thresholds
Based on the Coral Mountain Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis (Appendix L.2), the project has an
estimated service population (SP) of 1,698 residents, 434 employees associated with the hotel use, 240
employees associated with the retail use, and approximately 300 hotel occupants for a total service
population of 2,672. The SCAQMD defines the SP as the total residents and employees associated with
a project. The origin of the SP is based on CARB's 2008 Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan identified that
based on the GHG emissions inventories for the state, the people of California generate approximately
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-9 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
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. Because people who live in California
generally work in California, the SP metric did not include employees. As CEQA significance thresholds
were being determined by air districts, the air districts considered applying this efficiency metric to their
air district boundaries. Consistent with methodology provided by the Regional Targets Advisory
Committee (RTAC) as part of the SB 375 target setting discussions, the definition of SP was amended to
include employees in addition to residents. This is because the transportation sector is the primary
source of Project -related GHG emissions; and unlike the state, people who work in one county/air district
may not live in the same county/ air district boundary. Also, people who live in a county/air district
boundary would also have other trip ends such as school, parks, and retail uses. As such, the air
district/county boundary as a whole did not take into account other users within the site.
Relevant to the proposed project, the SCAQMD Tier 4 Option 3 is to utilize an efficiency target. 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 per SP as a
target.
The calculations behind this option are based on the same inventory calculated by CARB. The 4.8 metric
ton per SP target is based on the same statewide 2020 GHG inventory in the CARB Scoping Plan, i.e.,
295,530,000 MTCO2e/yr. To derive the project level SP of 4.8 metric tons, SCAQMD took the 2020
statewide GHG reduction target for land use only (295,530,000 MTCO2e/yr) and divided it by the total
2020 statewide population plus the total statewide employment for land use only (44,135,923 +
17,064,489) (i.e., (295,530,000 MT CO2e/yr)/(44,135,923 + 17,064,489) = 4.8 MTCO2e/yr). SCAQMD's
threshold is another metric for assessing compliance with AB 32, based on using numbers attributable
to certain sectors and trying to break down the analysis to a finer grain based on a per person
methodology associated with land use -related sectors.
This approach is a widely accepted screening threshold used by numerous cities in the basin and is based
on the SCAQMD staff's proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary source emissions for non-
industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for
Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans ("SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold"). The SCAQMD Interim GHG
Threshold identifies a screening threshold to determine whether additional analysis is required.
Although the SCAQMD's draft significance criteria have not been adopted, the City has determined that
the SCAQMD's project level efficiency threshold methodology can be used to set an appropriate
significance criterion by which to determine whether a project emits a significant amount of GHG. As
previously noted, the 2017 Scoping Plan identifies a reduction target of 40% below 2020 levels by 2030.
As such, the appropriate target for 2030 would be 2.88 MTCO2e/yr. For analysis purposes herein, the SP
threshold for the Project's buildout year of 2026 was calculated by linear interpolation between the 2020
target of 4.8 MTCO2e/yr and the 2030 target of 2.88 MTCO2e/yr. As such, the target for the Project's
buildout year of 2026 is 3.65 MTCO2e/yr.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-10 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Project Design Features (PDF)
The project incorporates the following design features and attributes for promoting energy efficiency
and sustainability, which shall be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the Development
Agreement. The following PDFs were accounted for in CaIEEMod to reduce emissions associated with
each applicable subcategory:
• 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.
• 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 retail and office buildings, a resident
does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her trip needs. A description of
diverse uses for urban and suburban areas is provided below
• 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.
• Voluntary Commute Trip Reduction Program — A multi -strategy program that encompasses a
combination of individual measures. It is presented as a means of preventing double -counting of
reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a
maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a
voluntary program.
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules reduces the number of commute
trips and therefore VMT traveled by employees. Alternative work schedules could take the form
of staggered starting times, flexible schedules, or compressed work weeks.
• This project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually
service employees' commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and
surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer
purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program
administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a
mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer's purview, and rider charges are normally set on
the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
• The project will design building shells and building components, such as windows; roof systems:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-11 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
electrical and lighting systems: and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems to meet
2019 Title 24 Standards which are expected to result in 30% less energy use for non-residential
buildings and 53% less energy use for residential use due to lighting upgrades.
• 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:
• Increasing the vehicle occupancy by ride sharing will result in fewer cars driving the same trip,
and thus a decrease in VMT. The project will include a ride -sharing program as well as a
permanent transportation management association membership and funding requirement. The
project will promote ride -sharing programs through a multi -faceted approach such as:
• Designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride sharing vehicles
• Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride -sharing
vehicles
• Providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides
• The project will implement marketing strategies to reduce commute trips. Information
sharing and marketing are important components to successful commute trip reduction
strategies. Implementing commute trip reduction strategies without a complementary marketing
strategy will result in lower VMT reductions. Marketing strategies may include:
• New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options
• Event promotions
• Publications
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of water -efficient plumbing fixtures.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
• Installation of light -emitting diode (LED) technology within homes.
• Use of recycled water for common area landscape irrigation.
• 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-12 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
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.
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment
Project implementation would result in construction and operational GHG emissions. Construction -
related GHG emissions will be short-term, while operational emissions will occur throughout the life of
the project.
Construction Emissions
Project construction activities would generate CO2 and CH4 emissions. Construction related
are expected from the following construction activities:
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
emissions
The GHG and Air Quality studies assumed a Phase 1 construction commencement date ofJuly 2020, with
construction lasting through December 2021; Phase 2 construction from September 2022 through
February 2023; and Phase 3 construction from July 2023 through December 2026. The construction
schedule utilized in the analysis, shown in Table 4.7-1, represents a "worst-case" analysis scenario
consistent with other technical studies prepared for this project. 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. 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
CaIEEMod defaults and the opening year of each respective phase.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-13 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4.7-1 Construction Duration
Phase Name
Start Date
End Date
Days
Phase 1 (2021)
Site Preparation
07/01/2020
08/25/2020
40
Grading
08/26/2020
01/26/2021
110
Building Construction
01/27/2021
11/02/2021
200
Paving
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Architectural Coating
09/01/2021
12/14/2021
75
Phase 2 (2023)
Site Preparation
09/19/2022
09/19/2022
1
Grading
09/20/2022
09/21/2022
2
Building Construction
09/22/2022
02/08/2023
100
Paving
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Architectural Coating
02/09/2023
02/15/2023
5
Phase 3 (2026)
Site Preparation
07/09/2023
03/15/2024
180
Grading
03/16/2024
12/20/2024
200
Building Construction
12/21/2024
11/20/2026
500
Paving
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
Architectural Coating
09/01/2025
12/04/2026
330
Project implementation will involve off-site construction improvements within the existing Avenue 58
right-of-way, between the project site and the existing IID substation facility during Phase 1 of the
development. Construction emissions associated with any off-site improvements, including the off-site
IID facilities, are included in the overall construction calculations, and no impacts beyond what have
already been identified are anticipated.
All ground disturbance will be subject to the regulatory dust control plan preparation and applicable
measures. As a standard requirement, all disturbed surfaces associated with this work shall be restored
to a stabilized condition; whether it involves restoration of existing pavement, hardscape, landscaping,
or the application of soil binder on native soils.
GHG emissions resulting from construction activities were quantified and amortized over the life of the
project using SCAQMD's recommended methodology. This process involved calculating the total GHG
emissions for construction activities, then dividing that quantity by a 30 -year project life, then adding
that quantity to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. The annual and amortized construction
emissions are presented in Table 4.7-2.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-14 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4.7-2 Summary of Construction Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
Year
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2e
Phase 1 (2020)
420.55
0.13
0.00
423.81
Phase 1 (2021)
1,742.12
0.21
0.00
1,747.49
Phase 2 (2022)
119.03
0.03
0.00
119.75
Phase 2 (2023)
50.31
0.01
0.00
50.61
Phase 3 (2023)
319.15
0.10
0.00
321.68
Phase 3 (2024)
898.09
0.26
0.00
904.49
Phase 3 (2025)
4,513.59
0.33
0.00
4,521.80
Phase 3 (2026)
4,340.28
0.34
0.00
4,348.88
Total Annual Construction
Emissions
12,403.12
1.42
0.00
12,438.51
Construction emissions
amortized over 30 years
413.44
0.05
0.00
414.62
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 and Distribution, and Solid Waste. Such sources are summarized below, and a comprehensive
description provided in Appendix I:
Area Source Emissions
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
GHGs are emitted from buildings as a result of activities for which electricity and natural gas are typically
used as energy sources. Combustion of any type of fuel emits CO2 and other GHGs directly into the
atmosphere; these emissions are considered direct emissions associated with a building; the building
energy use emissions do not include street lighting'. GHGs are also emitted during the generation of
1 The CaIEEMod emissions inventory model does not include indirect emission related to street lighting. Indirect emissions related to street lighting are
expected to be negligible and cannot be accurately quantified at this time as there is insufficient information as to the number and type of street lighting
that would occur.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-15 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
electricity from fossil fuels; these emissions are considered to be indirect emissions. Unless otherwise
noted, CaIEEMod default parameters were used.
California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings are updated
periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and
methods. 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. Because CaIEEMod was created before the
implementation of the latest energy standards, the CaIEEMod defaults for Title 24 — Electricity, Title 24
— Natural Gas, and Lighting Energy were reduced by 30% for nonresidential uses and 53% for residential
uses in order to reflect consistency with the 2019 Title 24 standard.
Mobile Source Emissions
Project mobile source GHG emissions are primarily dependent on overall daily vehicle trip generation.
Trip characteristics available from the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) were
utilized in this analysis. Trip lengths were determined based on the regional travel demand model. The
Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM) was used to estimate trip lengths for the
residential and non-residential portions of the project. Based on RIVTAM, the residential portion of the
project results in an average trip length of 5.55 miles and the non-residential portion of the project
results in an average trip length of 15.17 miles.
The use of a travel demand model is supported by substantial evidence since the information contained
in the model is specific to the region and for the land use type being proposed. Furthermore, the use of
travel demand models is also a recommended practice that is being promoted by the Governor's Office
of Planning and Research (OPR) in their updated CEQA guidelines with respect to Senate Bill 743. The
procedure described by OPR in their SB 743 technical advisory is precisely the method that has been
used to calculate trip lengths for purposes of this analysis.
Fleet Mix
A vehicle fleet mix consistent with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS) Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol was used in this
analysis. It should be noted that this fleet mix is more appropriate than the CaIEEMod default fleet mix,
which includes classes of vehicles that are unlikely to access the Project site, rather than primarily
passenger cars expected for the project, consistent with the Caltrans recommendations.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-16 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
on the volume of water as well as the sources of the water. Project water use is based on information
provided in the WSA/WSV (Appendix M).
Solid Waste
Residential land uses will result in the generation and disposal of solid waste. 65% 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 emissions
associated with the disposal of solid waste associated with the proposed Project were calculated by
CaIEEMod using default parameters.
Proposed Project
In order to ensure a worst-case analysis of total GHG emissions for the project, total annual
emissions for the project were calculated separately (as shown in Table 4.7-3), and then total
GHG emissions from the maximum 16 days of special events were calculated (see Table 4.7-5),
and the two totals were added together for the maximum annual GHG emissions for the project
(See Table 4.7-7). Impacts without PDFs
As shown on Table 4.7-3, the project GHG emissions without PDFs would be 16,725.03 MTCO2e per year.
Table 4.7-3 Project GHG Emissions without PDFs
Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2e
Annual construction -
related emissions
amortized over 30 years
413.44
0.05
0.00
414.62
Area Source
474.61
0.02
0.01
461.69
Energy Source
7,105.62
0.16
0.05
6,887.43
Mobile Source
7,759.01
0.22
0.00
7,506.45
Waste
155.55
9.19
0.00
372.55
Water Usage
1,072.86
1.41
0.04
1,082.29
Total CO2e (All Sources)
16,725.03
Impacts with PDFs
As shown on Table 4.7-4, the project with PDFs would be 11,736.67 MTCO2e per year.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.7-17
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4.7-4 Project GHG Emissions with PDFs
Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2e
Annual construction -
related emissions
amortized over 30 years
413.44
0.05
0.00
414.62
Area Source
7.20
0.01
0.00
7.13
Energy Source
4,042.10
0.13
0.04
3,923.79
Mobile Source
6,823.97
0.21
0.00
6,602.23
Waste
54.44
3.22
0.00
130.39
Water Usage
634.51
1.41
0.04
658.51
Total CO2e (All Sources)
11,736.67
Special Events
The Project Applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of multi -day special events at this location
involving attendance of no -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day, with the peak numbers arriving or departing
on Saturdays (up to 16 event days per year). Emissions for special events have been calculated by
determining the daily GHG emissions for special events and multiplying by 16.
Impacts without PDFs
As shown on Table 4.7-5, the project without PDFs would result in 546.89 MTCO2e per year.
Table 4.7-5 Special Events GHG Emissions without PDFs
Year
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2E
Area Source
5.26
0.00
0.00
21.17
Energy Source
78.73
0.00
0.00
315.76
Mobile Source
35.80
0.00
0.00
143.27
Waste
1.72
0.10
0.00
17.08
Water Usage
11.89
0.02
0.00
49.62
Total Project CO2E
546.89
Impacts with PDFs
As shown on Table 4.7-6, the project with PDFs would result in 343.09 MTCO2e per year.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-18 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4.7-6 Special Events GHG Emissions with PDFs
Year
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2
CH4
N20
Total CO2E
Area Source
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.33
Energy Source
44.79
0.00
0.00
179.89
Mobile Source
31.65
0.00
0.00
126.71
Waste
0.60
0.04
0.00
5.98
Water Usage
7.03
0.02
0.00
30.19
Total Project CO2E
343.09
Proposed Project with Special Events
Impacts without PDFs
As shown on Table 4.7-7, the project would result in 6.46 MTCO2e per SP per year compared to the
threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year.
Table 4.7-7 Project with Special Events GHG Emissions without PDFs
Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N20 Total CO2e
Special Events
546.89
Proposed Project
16,725.03
Total CO2e (All Sources)
17,270.47
Service Population
2,672
Total CO2e/Service Population
6.46
Threshold
3.65
Threshold Exceeded?
YES
Project implementation would produce GHG emissions totaling 6.46 MTCO2e per SP per year, which
would exceed the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year, even after
implementing all feasible emissions reduction measures as enforceable project design features, and
therefore, would result in potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation measures. A mitigation
approach involving the purchase of carbon credits from a California Air Resources Board (CARB)-
approved carbon registry with independent third -party verification was evaluated to reduce impacts to
less than significant levels. The quantification of necessary credits is based on the annual exceedance of
the total project MTCO2e emissions, which in turn is used to calculate the MTCO2e per SP per year level.
To reduce the total MTCO2e per SP per year to less than 3.65, the total project CO2e emissions must be
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-19 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
reduced by 2,400 MTCO2e per year. This yearly quantity would total 72,000 MTCO2e over a 30 -year
project life. Therefore, a total of approximately 72,000 MTCO2e credits would be needed off -set the
estimated emissions to a level at or below the screening threshold. Examples of approved carbon credit
registries include the American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Verra. It is estimated that
the noted carbon credit quantities would reduce the net GHG emissions to 3.62 MTCO2e per SP per year,
which would be less than the 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year. The total mitigated values are shown in
Table 4.7-8.
Impacts with PDFs and Mitigation
The annual GHG emissions associated with the operation of the proposed Project, is shown on Table 4.7-
8, after implementation of all feasible emission reduction measures as enforceable PDFs and MM GHG-
1. As shown, Project -related GHG emissions are reduced to 3.62 MTCO2e per SP per year which is less
than the applicable threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e per SP per year. While implementation of Mitigation
Measure GHG-1, would offset the GHG emissions generated by the project that are in excess of the
applicable threshold, by reducing GHG emissions elsewhere through the purchase of carbon credits, it
would not change the actual GHG emissions levels of the project itself. Moreover, as the use of carbon
credits as mitigation for GHG emissions has not been widely adopted in the Coachella Valley area for
residential and resort community projects, this analysis conservatively considers impacts associated with
GHG emissions generated by the proposed project to be significant and unavoidable because the City
cannot determine with certainty that the project's GHG emissions will be reduced to a less than
significant level.
Table 4.7-8 Project with Special Events GHG Emissions with Mitigation
Emission Source
Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N20 Total CO2e
Special Events
343.09
Proposed Project
11,736.67
Total CO2e (All Sources)
12,078.31
Annual GHG Reduction (MM GHG-1)
-2400
Total Project CO2e (with MM GHG-1)
9,678.31
Service Population
2,672
Total CO2e/Service Population
3.62
Threshold
3.65
Threshold Exceeded?
NO
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.7-20
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
S8 32/2017 Scoping Plan Consistency
The 2017 Scoping Plan Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40% reduction below 1990 levels, set by
Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Table 4.7-9 summarizes the project's consistency with
the 2017 Scoping Plan. As summarized, the project will not conflict with any of the provisions of the
Scoping Plan and supports seven of the action categories.
Table 4.7-9 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary
Action
Responsible Parties
Consistency
Implement SB 350 by 2030
Increase the Renewables Portfolio Standard to
50% of retail sales by 2030 and ensure grid
reliability.
CPUC,
CEC,
CARB
Consistent.
Establish annual targets for statewide energy
efficiency savings and demand reduction that
will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide
energy efficiency savings in electricity and
natural gas end uses by 2030.
Consistent. The Project would be designed
and constructed to implement the energy
efficiency measures and would include
several measures designed to reduce energy
consumption. The Project would not interfere
with or obstruct policies or strategies to
establish annual targets for statewide energy
efficiency savings and demand reduction.
Reduce GHG emissions in the electricity sector
through the implementation of the above
measures and other actions as modeled in
Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) to meet
GHG emissions reductions planning targets in
the IRP process. Load -serving entities and
publicly- owned utilities meet GHG emissions
reductions planning targets through a
combination of measures as described in IRPs.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be
designed and constructed to implement the
energy efficiency measures, where applicable
by including several measures designed to
reduce energy consumption. The proposed
Project includes energy efficient field lighting
and fixtures that meet the current Title 24
Standards throughout the Project Site and
would be a modern development with energy
efficient boilers, heaters, and air conditioning
systems.
Implement Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels)
At least 1.5 million zero emission and plug-in
hybrid light-duty EV by 2025.
CARB,
California State
Transportation
Agency (CaISTA),
Strategic Growth
Council (SGC),
California Department
of Transportation
(Caltrans),
CEC,
Consistent. 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 2025 targets.
At least 4.2 million zero emission andplug-in
hybrid light-duty EV by 2030.
Consistent. 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-21
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Action
Responsible Parties
Consistency
Further increase GHG stringency on all light-
duty vehicles beyond existing Advanced Clean
cars regulations.
OPR,
Local Agencies
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source
Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with CARB efforts to further
increase GHG stringency on all light-duty
vehicles beyond existing Advanced Clean cars
regulations.
Medium- and Heavy -Duty GHG Phase 2.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source
Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or
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 will be zero
emission buses with the penetration of zero -Strategy.
emission technology ramped up to 100% of
new sales in 2030. Also, new natural gas buses,
starting in 2018, and diesel buses, starting in
2020, meet the optional heavy-duty low-NOx
standard.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source
The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with CARB efforts improve transit
source emissions.
Last Mile Delivery: New regulation that would
result in the use of low NOx or cleaner engines
and the deployment of increasing numbers of
zero -emission trucks primarily for class 3-7 last
mile delivery trucks in California. This measure
assumes ZEVs comprise 2.5% of new Class 3-7
truck sales in local fleets starting in 2020,
increasing to 10% in 2025 and remaining flat
through 2030.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source
Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with CARB efforts to improve last
mile delivery emissions.
Further reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
through continued implementation of SB 375
and regional Sustainable Communities
Strategies; forthcoming statewide
implementation of SB 743; and potential
additional VMT reduction strategies not
specified in the Mobile Source Strategy but
included in the document "Potential VMT
Reduction Strategies for Discussion."
Consistent. This Project would not obstruct
or interfere with implementation of SB 375
and would therefore not conflict with this
measure.
Increase stringency of SB 375 Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2035 targets).
CARB
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source
Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with CARB efforts to Increase
stringency of SB 375 Sustainable Communities
Strategy (2035 targets).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-22
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Action
Responsible Parties
Consistency
Harmonize project performance with
emissions reductions and increase
competitiveness of transit and active
transportation modes (e.g. via guideline
documents, funding programs, project
selection, etc.).
Ca ISTA,
SGC,
OPR,
CARB,
Governor's Office of
Business and
Economic
Development (GO-
Biz),
California
Infrastructure and
Economic
Development Bank
(IBank),
Department of
Finance (DOF),
California
Transportation
Commission (CTC),
Caltrans
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with agency efforts to harmonize
transportation facility project performance
with emissions reductions and increase
competitiveness of transit and active
transportation modes.
By 2019, develop pricing policies to support
low-GHG transportation (e.g. low -emission
vehicle zones for heavy duty, road user,
parking pricing, transit discounts).
Ca ISTA,
Caltrans,
CTC,
OPR,
SGC,
CARB
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with agency efforts to develop
pricing policies to support low-GHG
transportation.
Implement California Sustainable Freight Action Plan
Improve freight system efficiency.
Ca ISTA,
CaIEPA,
CNRA,
CARB,
Caltrans,
CEC,
GO -Biz
Consistent. This measure would apply to all
trucks accessing the Project site, this may
include existing trucks or new trucks that are
part of the statewide goods movement
sector. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with agency efforts to Improve
freight system efficiency.
Deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and
equipment capable of zero emission operation
and maximize both zero and near -zero
emission freight vehicles and equipment
powered by renewable energy by 2030.
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere with agency efforts to deploy over
100,000 freight vehicles and equipment
capable of zero emission operation and
maximize both zero and near -zero emission
freight vehicles and equipment powered by
renewable energy by 2030.
Adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a
Carbon Intensity reduction of 18%.
CARB
Consistent. When adopted, this measure
would apply to all fuel purchased and 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%.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-23
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Action
Responsible Parties
Consistency
Implement the Short -Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS) by 2030
40% reduction in methane and
hydrofluorocarbon emissions below 2013
levels.
CARB,
CalRecycle,
CDFA,
SWRCB,
Local Air Districts
Consistent. The Project would be required to
comply with this measure and reduce any
Project -source SLPS emissions accordingly.
The Project would not obstruct or interfere
agency efforts to reduce SLPS emissions.
50% reduction in black carbon emissions below
2013 levels.
By 2019, develop regulations and programs to
support organic waste landfill reduction goals
in the SLCP and SB 1383.
CARB,
California Recycling
Market Development
Act (CalRecycle),
CDFA,
California State Water
Resource Control
Board (SWRCB),
Local Air Districts
Consistent. The Project would implement
waste reduction and recycling measures
consistent with State and City requirements.
The Project would not obstruct or interfere
agency efforts to support organic waste
landfill reduction goals in the SLCP and SB
1383.
Implement the post 2020 Cap -and -Trade
Program with declining annual caps.
CARB
Consistent. The Project would be required to
comply with any applicable Cap -and -Trade
Program provisions. The Project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
implement the post -2020 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
Protect land from conversion through
conservation easements and other incentives.
CNRA,
Departments Within
CDFA,
CaIEPA,
CARB
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to protect land from
conversion through conservation easements
and other incentives. In addition, the Project
site has already been previously planned and
approved for development.
Increase the long-term resilience of carbon
storage in the land base and enhance
sequestration capacity
Consistent. The Project site is vacant
disturbed property that has already been
planned and approved for development, and
does not comprise an area that would
effectively provide for carbon sequestration.
The Project would not obstruct or interfere
agency efforts to increase the long-term
resilience of carbon storage in the land base
and enhance sequestration capacity.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-24
June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Action
Responsible Parties
Consistency
Utilize wood and agricultural products to
increase the amount of carbon stored in the
natural and built environments
Consistent. Where appropriate, Project
designs will incorporate wood or wood
products. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to encourage use of
wood and agricultural products to increase
the amount of carbon stored in the natural
and built environments.
Establish scenario projections to serve as the
foundation for the Implementation Plan
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to establish scenario
projections to serve as the foundation for the
Implementation Plan.
Establish a carbon accounting framework for
natural and working lands as described in SB
859 by 2018
CARB
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to establish a carbon
accounting framework for natural and
working lands as described in SB 859 by 2018.
Implement Forest Carbon Plan
CN RA,
California Department
of Forestry and Fire
Protection
(CALFIRE),
CaIEPA and
Departments Within
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to implement the
Forest Carbon Plan.
Identify and expand funding and financing
mechanisms to support GHG reductions across
all sectors.
State Agencies &
Local Agencies
Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or
interfere agency efforts to identify and
expand funding and financing mechanisms to
support GHG reductions across all sectors.
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. Further, recent studies show that
the State's existing and proposed regulatory framework will allow the State to reduce its GHG emissions
level to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.
4.7.5 Cumulative Impacts
GHG emissions are understood to be inherently cumulative in nature with global implications. However,
the statewide climate change programs and GHG reduction strategies forming part of AB 32 and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-25 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
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. The GHG quantification and analysis conducted for this project resulted in a practicable strategy
of project design features inherent to the project undertaking, and a mitigatory carbon credit purchase
plan resulting in a GHG emissions per capita efficiency level meeting the established thresholds set forth
for California. The GHG emissions standards and strategies to which the project is held, are those that
have resulted in a measurable statewide reductions in per capita and total GHG emissions, reaching the
target 1990 levels. Moreover, according to the CARB report on California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for
2000 to 2017, California's GHG emissions have followed a declining trend between 2007 and 2017.
Future development within the City of La Quinta and region will be held to the same relative standard
of analysis, environmental review, and compliance. In this regulatory context, project implementation is
not expected to result cumulatively considerable contributions to GHG levels.
4.7.6 Mitigation Measures
GHG-1: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the Project Applicant shall purchase a minimum of
72,000 MTCO2e credits (2,400 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 2,400 MTCO2e per year (72,000 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.
4.7.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The net annual GHG emissions associated with the operation of the proposed project can be reduced
from 6.46 to 3.62 MTCO2e per SP per year, which is less than the applicable threshold of 3.65 MTCO2e
per SP per year. 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, and because even with the purchase of carbon credits the project's actual GHG emissions
exceed the applicable threshold (even though the emissions, net of carbon credits, do not), this analysis
conservatively considers the project to have a significant and unavoidable impact concerning GHG
emissions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-26 June 2021
4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.7.8 Resources
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 2017, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators,
2019 Edition, California Air Resources Board; Release No. 18-37 & 19-35, California Air Resources
Board Press Release, July 2018 and August 2019
3. Coral Mountain Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), prepared by Urban Crossroads
on November 12, 2020 and revised on March 1, 2021
4. Federal Clean Air Act (CWA)
5. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), by South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD), March 2017
6. Final 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (CVSIP), by SCAQMD, August 2003;
and sections of the SCAQMD Rule Book
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.7-27 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4,8.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing setting and proposed improvements to the project site that could
result in the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials of on-site or off-site activities. This
section also analyzes impacts associated with the project that may potentially affect public health and
safety or degrade the environment. The analysis is based on the information contained in the Coral
Mountain Resort Specific Plan regarding proposed land use, 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.
Prior to the preparation of the Draft EIR, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared. The Coral
Mountain Resort NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. Following the screening criterion
related to hazards and hazardous materials in the NOP, threshold topic "e" does not require
additional analysis in this Draft EIR.
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:
- The project is not located within an airport land use plan or private airstrip. The Jacqueline
Cochran Regional Airport is located approximately 4.25 miles to the east of the proposed
project. As a result, the project is located outside of the airport's influence and planning area.
Flights approaching and departing the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport may fly over the
City and the project site with an intermittent frequency. Therefore, neither will the project
cause a safety hazard, nor will airport noise impact the project, and no impact will occur.
Issue areas identified as having no impact are further discussed in Chapter 6.0, Effects Found to have
No Impact of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in
this Draft EIR.
4.8.2 Existing Conditions
Hazardous Materials
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-1 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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.
Hazardous Waste
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) simply defines hazardous waste as a waste
with properties that make it dangerous or capable of having a harmful effect on human health or the
environment. Hazardous waste is generated from sources ranging from industrial manufacturing
process wastes to batteries and may come in many forms, including liquids, solids, gases, and sludges.
These can include everyday commercial products, such as pesticides, cleaning fluids, and household
sprays, as well as byproducts of manufacturing processes. 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.
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 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.
Many types of businesses can be producers of hazardous waste. Small businesses such as dry cleaners,
auto repair shops, medical facilities or hospitals, photo processing centers, and metal plating shops
are usually generators of small quantities of hazardous wastes. Generators of large quantities of
hazardous waste include chemical manufacturers, large electroplating facilities, and petroleum
refineries. All significant spills, releases or threatened releases of hazardous materials must be
immediately reported.
In the City of La Quinta, 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" facilities
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-2 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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 La Quinta. Adverse environmental
impacts can occur when household hazardous materials are disposed of in unlined sanitary landfills,
where these materials may leach through the soil and contaminate groundwater.
Development activities have the potential to encounter previously unknown hazardous materials
contamination from historical use of a property. However, such contamination can be mitigated 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
a violation of federal or State law to improperly store, apply, transport, or dispose of hazardous
materials and waste.
Project Site
The Coral Mountain Resort project is located on approximately 386 acres of vacant land on the
southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street in La Quinta. The project would result in 496 low
density residential units; a resort hotel with up to 150 keys; 104 resort residential units; a 16.62 -acre
recreational surf facility, 57,000 square feet of resort commercial development; 60,000 square feet
of neighborhood commercial uses; and open space recreational uses on approximately 23.6 acres.
Offsite improvements
In addition to the proposed onsite development, project implementation will also include the
installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation,
located at 81600 Avenue 58, and the extension of conduit from the substation to the project site
under Avenue 58. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right-
of-way.
Local Schools
The project site is located within the boundary of the Coachella Valley Unified School District. The
closest school is the Westside Elementary School, located approximately 1.30 miles northeast of the
project site at 82225 Airport Boulevard in Thermal.
Public Airports/Private Airstrips
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-3 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport is located at 56-850 Higgins Drive in Thermal, California
approximately 4.25 miles east of the project. The project site is outside the Airport Land Use
Compatibility Zone.
Urban/Wildland Interface
The project site is located adjacent to both undeveloped natural mountain landscapes and developed
residential communities. The natural open space area west and southwest of the project site is
associated with Coral Mountain. The foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains are located west and
southwest of the project and are designated as a Conservation Area of the Coachella Valley Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). Disturbance within the conservation area is not
proposed.
4.8,3 Regulatory Setting
Key federal, state, and local laws, regulations and policies that are relevant to hazards and hazardous
materials 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 Coral Mountain Resort project.
Federal Programs
United States Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a federal agency with the mission to protect human
health and the environment by developing and enforcing regulations, providing grants, studying
environmental issues, sponsoring partnerships, publishing information, and educating people about
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
maintains a list of hazardous materials and procedures when dealing with hazardous waste and
materials. Various rules regulate the use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials.
A waste is determined to be hazardous if it is specifically listed on one of four lists (the F, K, P and U
lists) found in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in Section 261 and discussed in further
detail below:
• The F -list identifies wastes from common manufacturing and industrial processes as
hazardous from non-specific sources (40 CFR Section 261.31). They can be divided into seven
groups depending on the type of manufacturing or industrial operation that creates them.
These groups include spent solvent wastes, electroplating and other metal finishing wastes,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-4 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
dioxin -bearing wastes, chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons production, wood preserving
wastes, petroleum refinery wastewater treatment sludges, and multisource leachate.
• The K -list identifies hazardous wastes from specific sectors of industry and manufacturing and
are considered source -specific wastes. To qualify as a K -listed hazardous waste, a waste must
fit into one of the following industries: wood preservation, organic chemicals manufacturing,
pesticides manufacturing, petroleum refining, veterinary pharmaceuticals manufacturing,
inorganic pigment manufacturing, inorganic chemical manufacturing, explosives
manufacturing, iron and steel production, primary aluminum production, secondary lead
processing, ink formulation, and coking (processing of coal to produce coke).
• The P and U lists designate as hazardous waste pure and commercial grade formulations of
certain unused chemicals that are being disposed. For a waste to be considered a P- or U -listed
waste it must meet the following three criteria: (1) the waste must contain one of the
chemicals listed on the P or U list; (2) the chemical in the waste must be unused; and (3) the
chemical in the waste must be in the form of a commercial chemical product. The P -list
identifies acute hazardous wastes from discarded commercial chemical products, while the U -
list identifies hazardous wastes from discarded commercial chemical products.
More recent EPA efforts and responsibilities for managing hazardous waste include the management
of wastes from homeland security incidents. The Waste Management for Homeland Security
Incidents Act requires EPA to provide technical support to federal, state, local, and tribal authorities
on waste management and cleanup efforts resulting from natural disasters, terrorist attacks, major
accidents, and disease outbreaks. 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.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The EPA has the authority and responsibility to regulate hazardous waste through 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. Amendments to
RCRA, including the 1984 Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments, and those established in
1986, required EPA to increase enforcement of underground storage tanks for petroleum and other
hazardous substances, focus on waste minimization programs, such as phasing out hazardous wastes
from landfills, and finally mandating corrective measures regarding the release of hazardous waste.
More recent EPA efforts and responsibilities for managing hazardous waste include management of
wastes from homeland security incidents. The Waste Management for Homeland Security Incidents
Act requires EPA to provide technical support to federal, state, local, and tribal authorities on waste
management and cleanup efforts resulting from natural disasters, terrorist attacks, major accidents,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-5 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
and disease outbreaks. 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.
Hazardous Materials Transport Regulations
The United States Department of Transportation (DOT) was established on October 15, 1996 by
Congress. The U.S. DOT's purpose is to ensure the safest, most efficient and modern transportation
system is provided to improve the quality of life of people and communities and increase the
productivity and competitiveness of workers and businesses in the nation.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA) Office of Hazardous Materials
Safety is a component of the U.S. DOT that carries out a national safety program, including security
matters, to protect against the risks to life and property inherent in the transportation of hazardous
materials in commerce by all transportation modes. This is accomplished by developing, proposing
and implementing regulatory policy initiatives and regulations governing the safe and secure
transportation of hazardous materials. The PHMSA conducts safety inspections and investigations to
ensure transportation safety and security by conducting compliance inspectors and incident and
accident response and investigations.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, otherwise known as
CERCLA or Superfund, was established to provide a federal "Superfund" to clean up uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous -waste sites as well as accidents, spills, and other emergency releases of
pollutants and contaminants into the environment. Through CERCLA, the EPA was given power to
seek out those parties responsible for any release and assure their cooperation in the cleanup.
The EPA cleans up orphan sites when potentially responsible parties cannot be identified or located,
or when they fail to act. Through various enforcement tools, the EPA obtains private party cleanup
through orders, consent decrees, and other small party settlements. The EPA also recovers costs from
financially viable individuals and companies once a response action has been completed. Superfund
site identification, monitoring, and response activities in states are coordinated through state
environmental protection or waste management agencies. CERCLA was reauthorized and expanded
in 1986.
Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act
The Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted in 1986 by
Congress as national legislation on community safety. This law is designed to help local communities
protect public health, safety, and the environment from chemical hazards. Congress requires each
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-6 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
state to appoint a State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) as a part of EPCRA. The SERCs are
required to divide their states into Emergency Planning Districts and to name a Local Emergency
Planning Committee (LEPC) for each district. The EPCRA requires industry to report on the storage,
use and releases of hazardous substances to federal, state, and local governments.
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was established in 1972 as the basic structure for regulating discharges
of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.
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. 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.
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)
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.
State Programs
Hazardous Waste Control Law
The Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) is the primary hazardous waste management system in
the State of California. The HWCL specifies that generators have the primary duty to determine
whether their wastes are hazardous and to ensure their proper management. The HWCL also
establishes criteria for the reuse and recycling of hazardous wastes used or reused as raw materials.
The HWCL exceeds federal requirements by mandating source reduction planning, and has much
broader requirement for permitting facilities that treat hazardous waste. It also regulates a number
of types of waste management activities that are not covered by the RCRA.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-7 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Tanner Act
Although there are numerous state policies dealing with hazardous waste materials, the most
comprehensive is the Tanner Act (AB 2948) that was adopted in 1986. The Tanner Act governs the
preparation of hazardous waste management plans and the siting of hazardous waste facilities in the
State of California. The act also mandates that each county adopt a Hazardous Waste Management
Plan. To be in compliance with the Tanner Act, local or regional hazardous management plans need
to include provisions that define (1) the planning process for waste management, (2) the permit
process for new and expanded facilities, and (3) the appeal process to state available for certain local
decisions.
California Environmental Protection Agency
As a branch under the EPA, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) has broad
jurisdiction over hazardous materials management in the State of California. CaIEPA'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), 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 the following:
• Overseeing cleanups at improperly managed waste sites.
• Ensuring those who generate, handle, transport, store and dispose of hazardous waste do
so properly.
• Enforcement actions against those who fail to manage hazardous waste appropriately.
• Exploring and promoting pollution prevention and encouraging reuse and recycling.
• Evaluating soil, water and air samples at sites and developing new analytical methods.
• Practicing other environmental sciences, including toxicology, risk assessment, and
technology development.
• Involving the public in DTSC's decision-making.
Within CaIEPA, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has primary regulatory
responsibility for hazardous waste management and cleanup to protect California and Californians
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-8 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
from exposures to hazardous wastes. The DTSC achieves this by regulating hazardous waste and
discovering ways to reduce its production in California. Enforcement of regulations for the generation,
transport, and disposal of hazardous materials are delegated to local jurisdictions, in agreements with
the DTSC. The DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of the
federal RCRA of 1976 and the California Health and Safety Code.
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
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. A search of the
EnviroStor database completed in March 2020 showed no listed or hazardous waste sites on the
project site.
Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List)
The provisions of Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the Cortese List.
The Cortese List is a planning document used by state and local agencies to provide information about
hazardous materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires CaIEPA to develop an
updated Cortese List annually, at minimum. The DTSC is responsible for a portion of the information
contained in the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide
additional hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. The project site is not on the
Cortese List.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
SWRCB is responsible for 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. The project site is located in Region 7, Colorado River Basin.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-9 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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,
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.
State and federal laws require detailed planning to ensure that hazardous materials are properly
handled, used, stored and disposed of, and, in the event that such materials are accidentally released,
to prevent or to mitigate injury to health or the environment.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-10 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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
for Local Responsibility Area lands for each county in California. These maps allow state and local
agencies to identify areas susceptible to wildfire hazards.
California Certified Unified Program Agencies
The California Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA) is a collection of state and regional agencies
in charge of regulating hazardous waste. They are responsible for the administration, permits,
inspection and enforcement of various environmental and emergency management programs,
including the Underground Storage Tank Program, the Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program,
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans, and Hazardous Waste Generator and Onsite Hazardous
Waste Treatment Programs. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) is responsible
for administrating and certifying the CUPA's. Two state agencies that are also heavily involved with
CUPA activities include the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the State
Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB).
Regional and Local Programs
Regional Water Quality Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is responsible for 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 (RWQCB) throughout California. 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-11 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The City of La Quinta falls under the jurisdiction of the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality
Control Board. The Colorado River Basin RWQCB 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.
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.
Riverside County Hazardous Materials Management Division
The Riverside County DEH's Hazardous Materials Management Division was designated as the
Riverside County Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). As CUPA for Riverside County, the Division
manages the following elements of the Unified Program:
• Hazardous Waste Generators
• Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program (HMBP) and the Hazardous Materials Release
Response Plan and Inventory Program
• Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Team
• Risk Management Prevention Program
• Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program
• Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act (APSA) Program
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-12 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Riverside County General Plan
According to the Safety Element of the Riverside County General Plan, hazardous materials include
the entire spectrum of such substances from pre -product materials to waste. Laws and regulations
that govern hazardous materials, and how they are stored, transported, and handled distinguish
between hazardous materials and hazardous waste. For regulatory purposes, hazardous materials are
defined as manufactured hazardous items and materials, as well as the pre -product hazardous
substances used to create them. These materials, both pre- and post -production, are subject to
extensive management for safety requirements. The waste generated by, or resulting from, the
production that process becomes hazardous waste, which must be safely disposed of in an
appropriate manner.
The Riverside County General Plan emphasizes the County's susceptibility to natural hazards such as
fires, in particular, the hillside terrain of Riverside County. Fire potential for Riverside County is
typically greatest in the months of August, September and October, when dry vegetation is paired
with the dry Santa Ana winds. To minimize the potential for disastrous loss of structures and life
(human and wildlife), a coordinated program to manage development in the hazardous areas has
been identified in the Safety Element of the County General Plan.
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 and analyzes an extensive list of the hazards faced by the County and
the City. It assigns each hazard a severity rating, indicating the amount of damage that would be done
to the City and the population should the hazard occur, as well as a probability rating, indicating the
likelihood that the hazard may occur within the County. Both ratings are on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4
being the most severe or the most likely to occur. The City then ranks the hazards from 1 to 19, with
1 indicating a higher priority/likelihood, and 19 indicating a lower priority/likelihood.
Per the City EOP, hazardous material (HazMat) accidents are ranked 9 out of 19 on the hazards list.
HazMat accidents involve the uncontrolled release of a hazardous substance(s) during storage or use
from a fixed facility or mobile transport. Releases of hazardous materials can be especially damaging
when they occur in highly populated areas or along transportation routes used simultaneously by
commuters and hazardous materials transports. There is a higher risk of HazMat accidents within the
City due to the multitude of transportation systems in the City.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-13 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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.
City of La Quinta Emergency Operations Center
The City operates an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in City Hall. Riverside County's EOCs,
located in Indio and Riverside as well as its mobile command post, could also provide assistance to La
Quinta in the event of an emergency. The City's emergency response effort is supported by
agreements with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, Riverside County Fire Department,
American Medical Response and the American Red Cross. Included in the EOC's tools is the CodeRED
emergency notification system, which allows the City to notify residents by phone of an imminent
threat.
Community Emergency Response Team
The City also relies on its Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) volunteers to assist with
emergency response during disasters. CERT is composed of residents and business people who have
completed the FEMA CERT training provided through the City of La Quinta Emergency Services
Division and the Coachella Valley Emergency Managers Association. The volunteers are trained to
help in their neighborhoods when an emergency occurs, and immediate help may not be available
from first responders.
La Quinta General Plan
Chapter IV of the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) addresses the various environmental hazards within
the City of La Quinta. 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.
The City's Emergency Services Division, Fire and Police Departments would be called upon in the event
of a spill or similar emergency relating to hazardous materials within City limits.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-14 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Household Hazardous Waste disposal events, or at a network of "ABOP" (Antifreeze, Batteries, Oil,
Paint) facilities operated by the County Waste Management Department.
In the event of a spill or leak of hazardous materials, initial response would be made by the closest
fire engine company, followed by response from a dedicated Hazardous Material Response Team.
The Riverside County Fire Department operates a Hazardous Materials Team, which operates
throughout the County and responds to incidents when necessary.
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.
4.8.4 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?
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-15 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Threshold topic "e", involving public airports or public use airport, is not analyzed since NOP analysis
concluded that there would be no impacts. See Chapter 6.0.
Methodology
Available data to determine the potential for impacts associated with hazards and hazardous
materials was assessed based upon the consideration of the project. Whether there is a potential for
cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials was assessed based upon the
consideration of the project, the project site, and related projects.
Project Design Features
Proposed building locations and design will be consistent with applicable state and local construction
requirements and standards. Hazardous materials used during construction and operation of the site
will be handled to manufacturer and industry standards. Additionally, the project will implement and
adhere to federal, state, and regional regulatory standards. This is discussed in greater detail in the
discussions below.
Project Impacts
a/b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, or release hazardous
materials into the environment
The project site is located in the southern portion of the City of La Quinta and is currently vacant and
disturbed. Surrounding land uses include the residential communities to the north, east, and south,
vacant land to the west, and Coral Mountain to the southwest. Avenue 58 delineates a portion of the
project's northern boundary, and Madison Street delineates a large portion of the project's eastern
boundary.
The approximately 386 -acre project proposes to develop a mixed-use community consisting of
residential, neighborhood commercial, tourist commercial, and recreational open space land uses.
The site was previously farmed.
The transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during project construction and
operation is discussed below, as is the site's potential to release hazardous materials into the
environment.
Construction
Construction of the proposed project is expected to involve the temporary management and use of
oils, fuels and other potentially flammable substances. The nature and quantities of these products
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-16 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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 that one acre, and administered by the RWQCB.
Per the CGP, the project's SWPPP shall include comprehensive handling and management procedures
for building materials, especially 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 should be stored indoors or under cover whenever possible or in areas with secondary
containment. The designation of staging areas for activities such as fueling vehicles, mixing paints,
plaster, mortar, and so on, 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. With such standard measures in place, less than significant impacts are anticipated during
construction.
Offsite improvements include the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing Imperial
Irrigation District (IID) substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58. Construction for the conduits and line
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-17 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
extension would occur in the existing right-of-way. Similar to onsite improvements, construction of
the offsite improvement is expected to involve the temporary management and use of oils, fuels and
other potentially flammable substances. Therefore, offsite construction activities would require the
implementation of appropriate BMPs in order to reduce the risk of spills and leaks of hazardous
materials used. Therefore, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant.
Operation
The proposed project includes a hotel/resort, commercial, residential, and recreational and open
space uses on approximately 386 acres of vacant land. The nature of these uses is not expected to
involve, as a primary activity, the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in
quantities or in a manner that would pose a threat to the project and its surroundings or create a
significant hazard through a foreseeable accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment. The regular operation of the proposed project would not result in
the use of hazardous materials in amounts that exceed what is typically required for resort,
commercial and residential uses. 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 a manner typical of similar projects throughout the City, to carry out the necessary
operations in each facility or use. However, these materials would not be present in sufficient
quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety, or the environment.
Based on the operation of existing wave facility (Surf Ranch Lemoore), the Wave Basin is anticipated
to use approximately 216,000 gallons of sodium hypochlorite (NaCIO) annually, or approximately
18,000 gallons monthly on the average. June, July, and August are months with the highest
consumption with up to 20,000 gallons on the average. Sulfuric acid consumption of approximately
14,440 gallons per year, or 1,200 gallons monthly on the average is also anticipated. Chemicals will
be stored on-site and fed into polyethylene tanks which are located inside a pre-engineered metal
building, in an area with a 24 -inch -high containment wall. Floors and the containment wall have a
chemical resistant coating. The tanks include the following capacities:
• 4,500 -gallon capacity for NaCIO;
• 500 -gallon capacity for polymers; and
• 500 -gallon capacity for sulfuric acid.
Surplus NaCIO and Polymers are received in caged intermediate bulk container (IBC) totes and stored
within a secure outdoor yard space.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-18 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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 Wave Basin and all hotel
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 Wave Basin prior to construction would be
the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health.
According to Riverside County Municipal Code Chapter 8.64, Disclosure of Hazardous Materials and
Formulation of Business Emergency Plans, the County established a system for permitting businesses
that handle hazardous materials in order to enforce minimum standards respecting such materials.
According to Chapter 8.64, chlorine and muriatic acid stored in combined aggregate quantities greater
than or equal to fifty-five (55) gallons, and/or greater than or equal to five hundred (500) pounds for
pools are considered hazardous materials. 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. The
proposed project will require the storage or handling of hazardous materials, as defined in Chapter
8.64 of the Riverside County Municipal Code, including pool disinfecting and cleaning supplies, and
shall be required to follow the procedures established in the Municipal Code and Chapter 6.95 of the
HSC. Adherence to federal, State, and regional regulatory standards will ensure impacts related to
the release of hazardous materials associated with the Wave Basin and public pools are anticipated
to be less than significant.
The operation of the off-site transformer bank at the existing IID substation is not anticipated to result
in the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The potential release hazardous
materials into the environment associated with the transformers will be overseen by IID, which has
programs in place to manage such releases, as they operate multiple substations. The conduits and
line extension will operate below grade and will not contain hazardous materials. Therefore, the use
of hazardous materials associated with the off-site improvements will result in less than significant
impacts.
As stated throughout this discussion, the materials required for the maintenance of landscaped areas
(i.e., fertilizers, pesticides, etc.), the Wave Basin, 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 lower impacts to less than significant levels. Compliance with these
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-19 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
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.
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 1/4
mile of an existing or proposed school. The closest school to the project site is Westside Elementary
School, located approximately 1.30 miles northeast of the project. Offsite improvements include the
construction and operation of a transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600
Avenue 58. The substation is located approximately one mile southwest of Westside Elementary
School. Therefore, the project's proposed onsite and offsite improvements will have no impact on
schools as it relates to 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
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the state,
local agencies and developers to comply with CEQA requirements to provide information about the
location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code section 65962.5 requires that a list
of these sites be maintained and updated least annually. The State's Department of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC) is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List.
Pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 and its subsections, record searches on the project property
were performed within multiple database platforms. The resources consulted included GeoTracker,
EnviroStor and the EPA Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO).
Two of the three databases, GeoTracker and ECHO, listed sites within one mile of the project. The
results are described below:
The GeoTracker database listed one registered Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup
Site within a one -mile radius of the project site. The registered LUST Site is listed as "KSL PGA West
Weiskoff/Nicklaus," registered at 80202 Avenue 58, approximately 0.25 miles west of the project
property. The potential contaminant of concern at this site was identified as gasoline; however, the
site has a status of "Completed -Case Closed" as of October 1999. Therefore, the facility will not affect
the project.
Similar to the GeoTracker database, the ECHO database highlighted one facility within a mile radius
of the proposed project. This site is registered as Capistrano and located west of Monroe Street and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-20 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
north of Avenue 58, approximately 0.75 miles northeast of the project site. This site is registered
under the Clean Water Act (CWA) as a minor general permit covered facility. The permit expired in
2014, however, the property had remained in compliance for three consecutive years with no
identified violations. Due to Capistrano's distance from the proposed project, and its status as "no
violations", the registered site is not anticipated to affect the project site.
The search results in the EnviroStor database did not identify any records of any site within a mile of
the project property, unlike the GeoTracker and ECHO databases. The EnviroStor database did not
identify any LUST Cleanup Sites, Land Disposal Sites, Military Sites, DTSC Hazardous Waste Permits,
DTSC Cleanup Sites, or Permitted Underground Storage Tanks on or around the project property.
As stated previously, both registered sites maintain statuses of "Completed — Case Closed" and "no
violation". The project will not exacerbate risks or impacts associated with the registered sites, due
to the project's nature and the sites' locations at least 0.75 mile from the proposed project. Therefore,
hazardous waste sites will have no impact on the proposed project.
Portions of the project site previously operated as agricultural land. Agricultural activities typically
include the storage and periodic application of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers. 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. Historical aerial imagery from 1996 indicates that
the site had been cleared of all agricultural remnants prior to 1996. At this time, no agricultural
equipment or infrastructure are present onsite. The presence of fertilizer or related chemical storage
related to farming activities do not exist onsite. Chemicals previously utilized during agricultural
operations have likely dissipated to insignificant levels due to the inactivity of the site for over 20
years. Therefore, it is unlikely that significant chemicals associated with previous agricultural activities
exist onsite.
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan
The Emergency Services Element of the 2035 La Quinta General Plan addresses multiple components
of the City's public safety services, including police and fire service, emergency medical response and
emergency preparedness. The City of La Quinta contracts for police services with the Riverside County
Sheriff's Department. According to the La Quinta Police Department website, there are two police
stations contracted with the City. These include the La Quinta Police station at 78495 Calle Tampico,
and the Thermal Sheriff's Station (Riverside County Sheriff's Department) at 86625 Airport Boulevard
in Thermal. The La Quinta Police station is approximately six driving miles northwest of the proposed
site and covers an area of over 33 square miles and a population of over 40,660 residents. The
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-21 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Thermal Sheriff's station is approximately 6.5 driving miles northeast of the project site and provides
police services to the cities of La Quinta, Coachella and southern Coachella Valley communities.
Fire services in the City of La Quinta are provided by three fire stations in the City including: Fire
Station #32 located at 78111 Avenue 52, Station #70 at 54001 Madison Street, and Station #93 at
44555 Adams Street. Station #70 is the closest station to the project property, lying approximately 2
miles north of the project site. Response times for fire services in the City are five minutes or less 90
percent of the time. Paramedic service is provided to the City of La Quinta and the project area by
American Medical Response (AMR). Paramedic staff is located at Station #70. The Police and Fire
Departments within the City rely on mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdictions to provide
additional services when necessary.
According to the City of La Quinta General Plan, the City's primary tool in preparing for emergencies
is its adopted Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The EOP establishes procedures and responsibilities
for City personnel and acts as a guide for the City's response to emergencies. The EOP is managed by
the Emergency Management Division Manager who is responsible for both planning and
implementation of emergency response efforts and preparedness in the City. The Division
coordinates with other local jurisdictions and the County of Riverside in emergency response training.
The City also participates in the California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS)
program, and FEMA's National Incident Management System (NIMS). Volunteer groups such as the
Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), the Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES)
and the Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) all participate in emergency response during
disasters or emergency situations.
Regional emergency evacuation routes for the Coachella Valley include the Interstate 10 freeway and
Highway 111, which lie approximately 7.60 miles north and 5.75 miles northeast of the project,
respectively. The City of La Quinta has developed and maintains an extensive arterial roadway
network. The City road network has been built essentially along a north -south grid with
interconnection with major arterials passing through adjacent jurisdictions. The project is adjacent
to the City's major roadways, which includes Avenue 58 (north), Madison Street (east), and Avenue
60 (south). Project access from these roadways would occur at two points on Avenue 58, two points
on Madison Street, and one point on Avenue 60. These roadways will provide public and emergency
access into and out of the project property. Vehicles accessing the street system will not interfere
with evacuation routes or plans, insofar as the project will not alter any existing street used for these
purposes. During construction, a Traffic Control Plan will be required as a condition of approval to be
implemented throughout all construction activities. This plan will reduce potential impacts that may
arise due to conflicts with construction traffic.
Primary resort/residential project access will be provided on Madison Street via the Main Access;
additional access for the resort/residential project will be provided on Avenue 60 via the South
Access; primary commercial access will be provided at all three driveways located at the project on
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-22 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Avenue 58, as well as at the main access on Avenue 60 for the resort and commercial areas within
the site (see the Transportation discussion). All project access points onto public streets, except the
access to the commercial project at the northeast corner, will be gated, as will the entrances to the
residential portions of the project in Planning Area 2. Project access points will be reviewed by the
Fire Department, to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles. For gated projects, the Fire
Department requires the installation of a Knox -Box Rapid Entry System or similar device to facilitate
emergency access by fire fighters and other emergency responders. This requirement will be included
as a condition of approval for the project, and assures that on-site emergency access impacts will be
less than significant.
Project implementation is not expected to interfere with the critical facilities, emergency
transportation and circulation, or emergency preparedness coordination. Prior to construction, both
the Fire Department and Police Department will review each sub -area plan as it is brought forward,
to ensure safety measures are addressed, including emergency access. The project will be reviewed
by City, Police and Fire officials to ensure adequate fire service and safety as a result of project
implementation. Impacts will be less than significant.
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires
The City of La Quinta is comprised of both urban and undeveloped uses. 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 occupied by vacant, undeveloped, and
agricultural land uses, as well as the Santa Rosa Mountains, which are undeveloped, apart from the
recreational uses (i.e. hiking trails) in this area. The undeveloped Santa Rosa Mountains in the
southern portion of the City are characterized by steep topographic gradients 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 terrain, which is steep, rocky, and dry. Furthermore, the Santa Rosa Mountains
are made up primarily of Granitic rock and sparse desert vegetation. The topographic character of the
Santa Rosa Mountains is not conducive for the growth of dense vegetation; and as a result, the
amount of fuel available for wildland fires is limited.
The project site, located on the southwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58, is currently
vacant with scattered desert vegetation. Existing land uses that surround the project includes a mix
of residential uses and vacant, undeveloped land. According to CALFIRE's Fire Hazard Severity Zones
in State Responsible Areas Map, the project site is not located in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). This map indicates that the project is located in an incorporated Local
Responsibility Area, while the area west of the project property is located within a Federal
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-23 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Responsibility Area. Additionally, CALFIRE's Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in Locally
Responsible Areas (LRAs) Map indicates that the project is located in a Local, State/Federal non-
VHFHSZ area.
With the foregoing, impacts of exposing people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland
fires are expected to be less than significant.
4.8.5 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 project, in conjunction with development proposals on these
properties. 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).
Implementation of regulatory compliance measures during construction and operation of a project
would not combine with any of the related projects to cause a cumulatively significant impact. During
construction, all projects would be required to implement best management practices established in
the project -specific SWPPP. 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.
The site would include the operation of resort, residential, and commercial uses. The project also
proposes the operation of a Wave Basin facility. Chemicals used for the maintenance of the Wave
Basin facility will be stored on-site and fed into polyethylene tanks which are located inside a pre-
engineered metal building. The Wave Basin and all hotel pools will 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. Additionally, the proposed project will require the
storage or handling of hazardous materials, as defined in Chapter 8.64 of the Riverside County
Municipal Code, including pool disinfecting and cleaning supplies, and will be required to follow the
procedures established in the Municipal Code and Chapter 6.95 of the HSC. Other projects, operating
currently or proposed in the future, are or will be subject to the same regulations. 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.
4.8.6 Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measures are not required.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-24 June 2021
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.8.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of existing regulations and standards identified above, along with the adherence to
federal, state, and regional regulatory standards will ensure project's potential impacts associated
with hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures are not
required.
4.8.8 Resources
1. GeoTracker, State Water Resources Control Board, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
accessed July 2019.
2. EnviroStor, Department of Toxic Substance Control,
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed July 2019.
3. Enforcement and Compliance History, Environmental Protection Agency,
https://echo.epa.gov/facilities/facility-search/results, accessed July 2019.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.8-25 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.9.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to analyze the hydrology and surface water quality context in which the
proposed project will be implemented. The subject principles, descriptions and supporting analysis are
based on multiple project -specific and general reference documents cited throughout this section, as
these provide the relevant background information.
At the project -specific level, the analysis primarily relies on the site hydrology and surface drainage
conditions described in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Master Hydrology Report, prepared by
MSA Consulting, inc. in January of 2021; Coral Mountain Tentative Tract Map 37815 Preliminary
Hydrology Report, prepared by MSA Consulting, inc. in April of 2020; the Coral Mountain Resort
Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), dated June 1, 2020; and the Water Supply
Assessment/Water Supply Verification, Coral Mountain Specific Plan, prepared by MSA Consulting, Inc.,
March 2020, Revised September 2020, approved by CVWD in April 2020 and amended in September
2020.
General reference documents include the City of La Quinta Master Drainage Plan, dated March 2009;
Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan, part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater
Master Plan, dated April 2015; Federal Clean Water Act (CWA); Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panels 06065C2244H and 06065C2900H effective April 19,
2017, and 06065C2925H, effective March 6, 2018; Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River
Basin Region (Basin Plan), January 2019; and Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan
for Urban Runoff and the associated Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, effective June 20, 2013;
Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Plan; 2018 Coachella Valley
Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan, December 2018; CVWD's 2015
Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP); and 2035 La Quinta General Plan, Flooding and Hydrology
Section of the Environmental Hazards Element (Chapter 4), February 2013.
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 Master Hydrology Report and Preliminary Hydrology Report cited above are provided in the
Appendices of this Draft EIR (Appendix 1.3 and J.1). The Preliminary WQMP is provided in Appendix 1.2.
Please consult Section 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-1 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.9.2 Existing Conditions
Relevant Principles in Hydrology and Stormwater 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
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 naturally replenished, or recharged, by
precipitation that seeps into the land's surface and by replenishment programs implemented by CVWD.
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 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, as the findings in this section explain, the regulatory mandates and engineering standards
established at the federal, state, regional, and local level are established to prevent land development
activities from incurring or causing such hydrologic changes (hydromodifications) or water quality
impairments to local resources. Stormwater management and adherence to surface water quality
standards are achieved through required measures and project design, such that physical disturbance,
vegetation clearing, earth movement, grading, and construction activities are not permitted without
demonstrating compliance with the local, regional, and state permitting authorities and the pertinent
regulations aimed at preventing stormwater impacts.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-2 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Regional Hydrologic Conditions
The project is located in the Whitewater River Watershed, which is an arid desert region encompassing
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, which is 65 to 75% less annual precipitation than western portions
of Riverside County and the coastal counties in Southern California. 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.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-3 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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.
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 is empowered with 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 managed by the City, and 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.
Rainfall Intensity for Project Area
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 also 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 (SPHA). For hydrology purposes, the
"controlling" 100 -year storm event is one with the intensity and duration capable of generating the
maximum stormwater volume, or being the worst-case scenario as a basis for properly sizing the storm
drain facilities, including inlets, pipes, outlets, and retention basins.
The requirement for using the 100 -year storm event as the basis for designing storm drain facilities is
stated in Section 13.21.120 (A) of the La Quinta Municipal Code and in La Quinta Engineering Bulletin
#06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems). In turn, the City's hydrology
criteria refer to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 14 (NOAA Atlas 14) as the
basis for determining 100 -year storm event rainfall quantities and durations. Based on this source, the
100 -year storm event for the project area is one that produces 1.44 inches for a 1 -hour duration, 2.14
inches for a 3 -hour duration, 2.76 inches for a 6 -hour duration, and 4.41 inches in a 24-hour duration. As
a standard requirement, these rainfall quantities have been factored into the Master Hydrology Report
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-4 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
for determining the corresponding stormwater volumes and necessary sizing of storm drain inlets, piles,
outlets and retention facilities.
Local Hydrologic Conditions and Existing Infrastructure
The existing hydrologic factors, such as topography, drainage, soils, and rainfall characteristics relevant
to the project site and tributary areas have been accounted for in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific
Plan Master Hydrology Report (Master Hydrology Report). This report studies the existing conditions
and reviews the allowable land uses in each planning area of the project to determine the necessary
stormwater management controls and their capacities to comply with the City's engineering standards
and requirements. Future development across each planning area, other than the Tentative Tract Map
and Site Development Permit that are part of the project, would be subject to preliminary and final
hydrology reports based on a final site design and associated engineering plans. Such final design reports
and plans would be subject to review and approval by the City engineer.
Existing ground conditions across the project site are physically defined by a leveled terrain with
scattered vegetation coverage resulting from past site clearing and agricultural operations on most of
the property that have since become inactive or fallow. Associated ground disturbance has also been
caused by multiple dirt roads, hiking paths, and underground irrigation lines. These prior uses modified
the on-site native terrain into a relatively graded condition that serves as the baseline for on-site
hydrology considerations and determination of impacts. In the northern part of the site, the prevailing
gradient and drainage trend occurs from northwest to southeast. In the center of the site, drainage
generally occurs from west to east. In the southern portion of the site, drainage occurs generally from
southwest to northeast. In this context, references to drainage pertain to temporary formation of
stormwater surface flows, including sheet flow, caused directly by rain events. West of Madison Street,
there are two existing earthen retention basins designed to accept stormwater runoff from an eastern
part of the site and from off-site street runoff attributed to a portion of Madison Street. Aside from
these earthen basins, the project site is absent of any private or public formal stormwater facilities, or
any naturally occurring drainage courses, such as those attributed to rivers, streams or washes. The
described project setting occurs on the east side of Coral Mountain and two engineered flood control
dikes (Dike No. 2 and Dike No. 4). The off-site dikes form part of the regional flood control system
operated by CVWD to retain alluvial fan drainage descending from the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa
Mountains. In this vicinity, the two dikes have established a physical separation between off-site
mountain drainage and the rest of the valley floor. These dikes are an important factor in determining
the flood zone designation for the project site. Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, panels 06065C2244H, 06065C2900H, and 06065C2925H, the project
site has a Zone X designation, which is deemed to be an "area with reduced flood risk due to levee" and
"area of minimal flood hazard" according to those panels.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-5 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The only form of off-site tributary drainage to the project property corresponds to a portion of vacant
land and of the Coral Mountain feature found west of the project. The off-site tributary area is a
combination of rock outcropping and open brush condition descending to a relatively flat vacant area.
Based on the US Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service, the project site has
two representative hydrologic soil groups, the rating of which is used to estimate runoff potential based
on the water infiltration capacity of such soils. Hydrologic Group A corresponds to soils having a high
infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained
to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. Approximately 97 acres (25 percent) of the 386 -acre site
have a dominant soil condition corresponding to Group A. Group B corresponds to soils having a
moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep,
moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine to moderately coarse texture.
Approximately 285 acres (74 percent) of the 386 -acre site have a dominant soil condition corresponding
to Group B. The remaining 4 acres (1 percent) consist of unrated rock -outcropping. Based on this
composition of soil ratings, 99 percent of the site has soils with moderate to high infiltration rating and
low runoff potential. The 4 acres (1 percent) corresponding to rock -outcropping are characterized as
having a low infiltration capacity and higher runoff potential.
From the aspect of water quality, silt and clay contents intermixed with the gravelly sands and fine sands
that predominantly make up the project area have a naturally occurring potential to contribute
suspended sediment and associated turbidity with stormwater runoff. The potential for sediment and
turbidity discharge is related to the soil's ability to produce runoff and carry those impairments from the
site. Considering that the runoff potential for the on-site soils is low, so is the potential for suspended
sediment and turbidity to be discharged into the local or regional watershed from the existing soil
conditions. Instances of runoff during storm events are understood to pond and evaporate at the low
elevation points.
4.9.3 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-6 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
It is worth noting that as defined in Section 13374 of the California Water Code (CWC), the term "Waste
Discharge Requirements" (WDRs) is equivalent of the term "permits" and therefore pertains to a
permitting process, written into general permits to regulate similar groups or activities. As discussed
below, the relevant WDRs to the project occur in the form of general permits applicable during
construction and after construction as part of the site operations. Compliance with WDRs is achieved
through the appropriate permit registration process under the applicable National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) programs described 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
(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.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-7 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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
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 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-8 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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. The SWPPP is required to provide limits of temporary disturbance and will
indicate the specific locations where stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be
implemented. Stormwater 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. The SWPPP must be prepared by
a registered Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) and implemented by a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner
(QSP) to ensure that the proper expertise is applied toward these plans.
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 EPA promulgated enforceable regulations
establishing MS4 Permit requirements under its NPDES Program. In California, EPA has delegated its
NPDES permitting authority to the SWRCB, which issues and enforces NPDES MS4 Permits through its
nine designated regions.
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 in the 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.
Indio 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-9 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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.
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 Thomas E. 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-10 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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
The 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 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).
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-11 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
managing 100 -year stormwater flows. In general, these provisions are consistent with the established
mandates at the regional, state and federal level cited above.
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 municipal separate storm drains; control of the discharge to municipal
separate storm drains from spills, dumping or disposal of materials other than stormwater; and
reduction of 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 one hundred years, also referred to as the controlling 100 -year
storm event. The design of such facilities is subject to approval by the City engineer.
City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm
Drain Systems)
The requirements for 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 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 (WQMP) to be implemented in accordance with the
Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit.
4.9.4 Project Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-12 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The following standards and criteria have been drawn from Appendix G: Environmental Checklist Form
of the CEQA Guidelines. Development of the project 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;
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 and Project Design Features
Proposed Stormwater Infrastructure
The relevant findings throughout this section rely in part on the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan
Master Hydrology Report (Master Hydrology Report), which has been prepared to evaluate the existing
hydrologic factors, such as topography, drainage, soils, and rainfall characteristics relevant to the project
site and tributary areas. Based on the existing conditions and proposed land uses in each planning area
of the Specific Plan, the Master Hydrology Report determined the most suitable configuration of tributary
areas to calculate the necessary stormwater management controls and their capacities to comply with
the City's engineering standards and requirements. As previously indicated, with the exception of the
Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit that are part of the current project, future
development across each planning area would be subject to a separate preliminary and final hydrology
report based on a final site design and associated engineering plans. Such final design reports and plans
would be subject to review and approval by the City engineer, in accordance with the analysis and
recommendations of the Master Hydrology Report and the City's established engineering standards and
requirements.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-13 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The Master Hydrology Report has divided the proposed site into multiple engineered drainage areas
generally consistent with the project's planning areas to facilitate the implementation of final engineering
design and sizing of stormwater facilities (inlets, pipes, outlets, and retention basins) according to the
phases of development. The proposed stormwater management concept would introduce on-site
retention facilities, surface and underground, sized to accept and infiltrate the stormwater volume
resulting from the controlling 100 -year storm event for the conditions of each project drainage area, as
mandated by Section 13.21.120 (A) of the La Quinta Municipal Code and outlined in the La Quinta
Engineering Bulletin #06-16. The retention criteria are equal across each drainage area, but would be
designed in final form based on the final site plan considerations undertaken for those areas in accordance
with the Specific Plan. For those planning/drainage areas where a site plan has not been determined, the
existing pervious condition would be maintained. Table 4.9-1 below summarizes the drainage area
calculations and corresponding retention volumes accounted for in the Master Hydrology Report, which
are depicted in Exhibit 4.9-1. It provides the drainage area identification, corresponding area calculation,
expected impervious ground cover resulting from development, the required retention capacity to handle
the controlling 100 -year storm event runoff volume, and the retention volume capacity provided by the
basin design. For each on-site drainage area, the project provides sufficient retention capacity to meet the
local requirements for properly retaining the 100 -year storm event.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-14 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
— - -
—
- — — —
-
Drainage Area Boundary
DA -G
Drainage Area
>
Drainage Flow
—
Retention Facilities
•
•
•
•
AVENUE 58
r --
DA -A1
•
y \\ `\ v III -D /
DA -C
PA II
DA -F
DA -G
I PAI II 14,
\ DA -H it\
/ a
/ /��`
3
•
PA IV
DA -A2
,
Coral \
Mountain t
( y _�
DA-I
PA II
DA -E
DA-OFF
(N)
//
'/7
//
/�71 f,7
/ I 4
1,'t'
II'-I`
JJI AVENUE 60
DA -A3
DA -OFF
(S)
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
MASTER HYDROLOGY
DRAINAGE AREA EXHIBIT
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.9-1
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Table 4.9-1 Summary of Drainage Areas and Retention Capacities
Drainage Area
Identification
Area
Calculation
Impervious
Condition and
Percentage of
Drainage Area
Required
Stormwater
Retention Capacity
to Manage the
Controlling 100 -Year
Storm Event Runoff
Volume
Retention Volume
Capacity Provided by
Basin Design
Does the
Provided
Retention
Capacity Meet
the Required
Design
Volume?
A
162.745
Acres
39.291 Acres
(24%)
803,730 Cubic Feet72.96
3,178,217 Cubic Feet
Acre -Feet
Yes
B
41.586 Acres
17.518 Acres
(42%)
182,917 Cubic Feet
292,016 Cubic Feet
6.70 Acre -Feet
Yes
C & F
55.002 Acres
17.771 Acres
(32%)
219 690 Cubic Feet
223,118 Cubic Feet
5.12 Acre -Feet
Yes
D
28.403 Acres
14.157 Acres
(50%)
134 950 Cubic Feet
168,719 Cubic Feet
3.87 Acre -Feet
Yes
E
61.802 Acres
19.059 Acres
(31%)
246 363 Cubic Feet
1,216,389 Cubic Feet
27.92 Acre -Feet
Yes
G
35.742 Acres
10.635 Acres
(30%)
141,025 Cubic Feet
147,099 Cubic Feet
3.38 Acre -Feet
Yes
H
7.118 Acres
6.406 Acres
(90%)
56,379 Cubic Feet
60,238 Cubic Feet
1.38 Acre -Feet
Yes
51.629 Acres
15.164 Acres
(29%)
202,969 Cubic Feet
237,233 Cubic Feet
5.45 Acre -Feet
Yes
Off -Site Portion
of Madison
Street (North)
11.704 Acres
(Off -Site)
5.754 Acres
(49%)
59,063 Cubic Feet
126,903 Cubic Feet
2.91 Acre -Feet
Yes
Off Site Portion
of Madison
Street (South)
5.701 Acres
(Off -Site)
4.014 Acres
(70%)
40,668 Cubic Feet
217,630 Cubic Feet
5.00 Acre -Feet
Yes
This section focuses on physical hydrology, water quality, and associated permitting. The discussion of
natural resources associated with local drainage conditions are analyzed in the Biological Resources
Section of this Draft EIR (Section 4.3).
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water quality
As defined in Section 13374 of the CWC, the term "Waste Discharge Requirements" (WDRs) is equivalent
to the term "permits" and therefore pertains to a process involving general permits to regulate similar
groups or activities, such as construction or municipal, or as individual permits to regulate specific
owners, operators or facilities. As discussed below, the relevant WDRs to the project occur in the form
of general permits applicable during construction implementation and after construction as part of the
MS4 water quality requirements. Compliance with WDRs is therefore achieved through the appropriate
permit registration process under the applicable NPDES programs described below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-16 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND 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.
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.
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. In the case of the proposed project, BMPs will be
established in each SWPPP, and could include such measures as storm drain inlet protection, erosion
control, 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. 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 the period 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. As proposed, the project does not involve any planned or allowable deviation from
the established permit requirements, and the project will not have any significant impacts.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-17 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Post -Construction Water Quality Management Plan
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.
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 the project.
The project -specific WQMP addresses post construction stormwater runoff quantity and quality
requirements through a documented strategy of site design and source controls 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 retention basins as the primary
method of LID and MS4 compliance. Each retention facility is allocated and sized to contain project area
runoff from the proposed impervious land cover consisting of structures, hardscape, and pavement. 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
goal. Concurrent with the hydrology report, grading, and engineering improvement plans, this document
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
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.
Wave pool maintenance during the life of the project will be conducted in accordance with the industry
standards and the manufacturer's specifications for the handling of maintenance -related materials and
associated equipment. Further discussion on the materials handling subject is provided in Section 4.8.
The wave pool maintenance is not expected to involve draining operations. Any emergency -related
temporary water pumping or conveyance procedures will be handled using on-site retention facilities
without the reliance on any off-site discharge operation. The proposed site plan and physical
improvements will prevent any point source or diffused source of discharge from the project property
or any runoff amount being capable of entering the public storm drain system or the Coachella Valley
Stormwater Channel, located approximately 7.5 miles to the east. Therefore, surface water quality
impairments will be prevented.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-18 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
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 establish 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 Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin is the primary groundwater source for the project region, with
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) being the domestic water purveyor serving the project area. The
Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin has an estimated storage capacity of 40 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 underlain by the Indio Subbasin, which is also known as
the Whitewater River Subbasin.
Groundwater is pumped by local wells and distributed for domestic purposes. To offset the amount of
water pumped by local wells, the region's water agencies import water from the Colorado River to
replenish the basin, recycle wastewater for irrigation, and incentivize conservation.
The Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) for Coral Mountain Specific
Plan was prepared for and approved by CVWD on April 14, 2020, with an approved revision dated
September 29, 2020. 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.
A complete analysis of the project's domestic water impacts is provided in Section 4.15, Utilities and
Service Systems. The findings of that section are summarized below. As shown in Table 4.9-2, at build
out, the proposed project is expected to consume approximately 958.63 -acre feet per year (AFY) based
on the residential indoor demand, non-residential indoor demand, and outdoor demands of the project.
The analysis in the WSA took into consideration the volume of water available in the aquifer, CVWD's
Colorado River contract supply, water rights and water supply contracts, and CVWD's commitment to
eliminate overdraft in its service area. Per the WSA, the project demand of 958.63 AFY, accounts for
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-19 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
approximately 0.49 percent of the total projected growth in water demand presented in the 2015 UWMP
for 2040. The project will conform to the requirements of CVWD's programs and requirements
pertaining to water management and conservation.
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. The project's outdoor
water demand calculations assume implementation of these requirements in project landscaping plans.
Compliance with these ordinances will ensure that the proposed project reduces water demand to meet
target demands.
CVWD has committed sufficient resources to further implement the primary elements of the 2010
CVWMP Update and 2015 UWMP, which includes the full utilization of imported water supplies,
purchase of additional water supplies, water conservation, and source substitution. Regarding
substantial decreases to groundwater supplies, less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Table 4.9-2 Coral Mountain Resort Estimated Project Water Service Demands
for Residential, Commercial, and Other Uses as Approved by CVWD
Land Use
Demand in Acre Feet per Year (AFY)
Residential Indoor Demand
97.22
Non -Residential Indoor Demand
59.94
Outdoor Demand
801.47
Total Project Demand
958.63
Groundwater Quality
The project includes a storm drain design based on a Master Hydrology Report that would allow for
retention of the stormwater volume resulting from the controlling 100 -year storm event for each
drainage management area. This required approach would meet the City's hydrologic requirements and
water quality objectives under a required WQMP, which is required to incorporate non-structural and
structural source controls to prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system. The following
measures are detailed in the Preliminary WQMP for this project. These measures are designed to prevent
pollutants from entering surface waters and eventually impacting groundwater.
Non -Structural Source Control Measures:
• Education for Property Owners, Operators, Tenants, Occupants, or Employees
• Activity Restrictions
• Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance
• Common Area Litter Control
• Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-20 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
• Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance
Structural Source Control Measures:
• Storm Drain Inlet Stenciling and Signage
• Landscape and Irrigation System Design
• Protect Slopes and Channels
• Properly Designed Trash Storage Areas
The preliminary hydrology study and WQMP for the Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit
portions of the project tier off the Master Report primarily in the criteria for stormwater retention basin
quantities per drainage area based on the planned land uses. The WQMP will identify the required non-
structural and structural pollution source control measures that work toward the protection of
groundwater quality. 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. 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 and enclosures and bins to prevent improper handling
and disposal.
The required non-structural and structural source control measures, including associated maintenance,
will be applicable during the life of the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-21 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The storm drain and basin system will be privately operated 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 prevent the discharge of untreated runoff into the storm drain
system. The 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. The retention operations are
therefore not expected to violate or interfere with the groundwater quality. Regarding ground water
quality, less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Groundwater Recharge
The nearest groundwater recharge facility to the project is the Thomas Levy Groundwater Replenishment
Facility, located south of the project and separated from it by Dike No. 4. The Thomas E. Levy
Groundwater Replenishment Facility was completed in 2009 as part of the district's ongoing effort to
ensure that a reliable supply of groundwater will continue to be available across the Coachella Valley.
The function of this facility is to percolate imported Colorado River water 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 eastern Coachella Valley
will be 25 to 105 feet higher than it would have been had CVWD not built this facility.
The replenishment facility accepts imported water through a system of underground lines that outlet
into the basins via riser structures. 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. The proposed development will not result in any physical
modifications to the existing CVWD recharge facility, nor will it result in any stormwater runoff condition
capable of interfering with the facility operation. Surface and underground retention, result in infiltration
and therefore contributes to on-site groundwater recharge. Existing off-site tributary runoff is also
incorporated into the on-site retention system, such that the project will not impede the existing
naturally occurring infiltration. 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
Existing conditions across the project site are characterized by leveled terrain with scattered vegetation
coverage resulting from past site clearing and agricultural operations on most of the property. These
prior uses modified the on-site native terrain into a relatively graded condition. In the northern part of
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-22 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
the site, the prevailing gradient and drainage trend occurs from northwest to southeast. In the center of
the site, drainage generally occurs from west to east. In the southern portion of the site, drainage occurs
generally from southwest to northeast. West of Madison Street, there are two existing earthen retention
basins designed to accept stormwater runoff from an eastern part of the site and from off-site street
runoff attributed to a portion of Madison Street.
Within the project area, the proposed land uses will result in an increase in impervious land cover
through the introduction of structures, hardscape and streets. Without engineering controls, such land
use changes would 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, the project will incorporate on-site infrastructure to intercept, convey,
and retain stormwater runoff resulting from the controlling 100 -year storm event. As described in the
Master Hydrology Study and shown in Exhibit 4-9, the project includes a proposed storm drain system
design in the area of the proposed Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit in which project
stormwater runoff is conveyed via engineered swales, gutters, and/or sheet flow toward distributed
drain inlets and subsequently storm drain lines connected to the receiving retention facilities located on-
site and at the lowest elevation point of each drainage management area, being the southeastern
portions respectively. Phase 2 and Phase 3 development will be held to the same standards. Each
component of the storm drain system that comes into operation will be subject to maintenance
measures during the life of the project to ensure effectiveness. By providing the appropriate stormwater
conveyance controls leading to on-site retention, the project will prevent siltation and erosion.
The project is also required to manage any off-site tributary area entering the project, including an off-
site portion of hillside west of the project, and off-site street runoff from a portion of Madison Street to
the east. The project is required to accept and provide sufficient capacity to integrate this off-site runoff
into the on-site storm drain system. The estimated impervious cover resulting from land development
of the allowable uses per the Specific Plan has been factored into the master hydrology report to
determine the necessary facility sizing to meet the City's requirements, as summarized in Table 4.9.1.
For the areas affected by the Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit, which represent final
design plans for these areas, the site specific hydrology study includes a system of storm drain capture
inlets, engineered conveyances, and retention basins sized and located to meet City and regional
requirements to prevent erosion and siltation.
For every drainage area associated with project implementation, the retention facilities will meet the
City's requirements and will have varying amounts of surplus capacity. By conveying project runoff along
engineered flow lines (pipes, surface swales, curb and gutter) instances of substantial erosion or siltation
will be prevented. The on-site pervious areas of the project 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 WQMP agreement that will be
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-23 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
required of this project prior to issuance of a grading permit. Therefore, 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;
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. The project site is covered by three FEMA FIRM panels: 06065C2244H and 06065C2900H
effective April 19, 2017, and 06065C2925H, effective March 6, 2018. Based on these sources, the project
area is covered by Zone X, an "area with reduced flood risk due to levee". The levee system being
referenced includes Dike No. 2 and Dike No. 4 located west and upgradient of the project site.
The Master Hydrology Report for this project has produced a calculation of stormwater runoff volume
production from the proposed land uses in each planning area based on the controlling 100 -year storm
event. The Master Report calculations take into consideration the increase in impervious ground cover
through the proposed structures, hardscape, and paving associated with each drainage area. The
impervious acreage and percentage respective to each drainage management area for the project are
summarized in Table 4.9-1 of this section. Table 4.9-1 also draws from the Master Hydrology Report to
summarize the expected quantity of controlling stormwater runoff volume from each drainage area,
which serves as the criteria to adequately size the proposed retention facilities.
The expected retention capacity ensures that the stormwater volume produced by the controlling 100 -
year storm event is safely conveyed into adequately sized storm drain facilities (catch basins, pipes, and
retention basins) to prevent flooding conditions capable of affecting on- and off-site uses. The second
function of this system is to allows for such volume to be infiltrated on-site instead of being discharged
off-site. By achieving both functions, the provided facilities will prevent increased runoff discharge
conditions capable of resulting in flooding on- or off-site. Table 4.9-1 of this section demonstrates that
sufficient retention will be provided for each drainage area to ensure compliance with the local
requirements and protect on- and off-site property from flood conditions. As a result, the traditional
impacts of land development, being an increase in total stormwater runoff volume, runoff velocity, and
peak discharge, and other hydromodifications capable of resulting in flooding, on- or off-site, will be
prevented in this project through on-site retention and infiltration of runoff.
The drainage designs for the SDP and TTM are based on the preliminary hydrology report submitted for
the TTM. The preliminary hydrology report will be refined based on final engineering design associated
with the Final Map, and in compliance with the City's established engineering standards. Drainage Area
A occupies the westerly portion of the project, and includes PA IV lands, as well as portions of PA III
proposed for subdivision in the TTM, and development approval in the SDP. As shown in Exhibit 4.9-1,
drainage subarea A2, which encompasses the southern half of the resort residential units and a portion
of the hotel area, will drain toward the wave basin. Storm runoff (approximately 18.4 acre-feet) from
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-24 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
this drainage sub -area is directed to the wave basin which provides over 73 acre-feet of retention.
Shallow basins are proposed to retain 10 -year storm flows from off-site drainage which enters the
project site and Drainage Area A along the toe of slope of Coral Mountain. During the final design
process, first flush storm flows from Planning Area 111 will be captured and conveyed to an underground
storage area prior to being discharged into the lagoon. Drainage Area B covers the single family lots on
the northwest portion of the TTM, which includes a lake feature at its center. Runoff within this drainage
area, estimated at 4.2 acre-feet, will be conveyed to the proposed lake feature. Drainage Area C, which
encompasses the northwestern portion of the resort residential area, generates an estimated 1 acre-
foot of storm flows that will be conveyed via a system of catch basins and pipes and controlled surface
flows and retained in a retention basin located in a proposed lake feature in Drainage Area F. Drainage
Area D includes the majority of the hotel site, and the eastern portion of the resort residential area
shown in the TTM. This runoff, estimated at 3.1 acre-feet, will be conveyed, via a system of catch basins
and pipes and controlled surface flows, to and retained in the proposed lake located in Drainage Area F.
Drainage Areas E through I, which are located in PA I and 11 and proposed currently only for large lot
subdivisions, will be subdivided at a later date, at which time each map will be required to provide
hydrology studies. The design of these drainage systems will be required to comply with the City's
requirements, including the retention of the 100 -year storm, based on the designs of each of these
subsequent maps. The City's standards and requirements assure that these future improvement plans
will result in less than significant impacts relating to surface runoff and its potential to cause flooding
either on- or off-site.
As a standard requirement under the City's Engineering Bulletin #06-16, the hydrology and storm drain
design must account for flood protection of structures from the 100 -year storm. Off-site flows from the
tributary hillside areas to the west are also handled by the project through retention facilities to be
constructed on-site. As such, the proposed storm drainage and flood control improvements are not
expected to substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site. Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
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
West of Madison Street, there are two existing earthen retention basins designed to accept stormwater
sheet flow runoff from the eastern part of the site and from off-site street runoff attributed to a portion
of Madison Street. The street runoff is accepted via two existing catch basins also on the west side of
Madison Street. The two existing retention basins have a combined capacity of approximately 7.9 acre-
feet (344,000 cubic feet).Runoff from the project, including all incremental increases resulting from the
conversion of pervious to impervious land cover, will be intercepted, conveyed, and retained on-site in
accordance with the City's engineering requirements as described in subsection (ii) above. The on-site
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-25 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
retention will therefore prevent any contribution of runoff quantities or additional sources of pollution.
The existing retention capacity of the existing system has been incorporated into the Master Hydrology
Report, such that it must be factored into the site design considerations to prevent this capacity from
being diminished in any way. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
The City of La Quinta and CVWD are co -permittees of the Whitewater River MS4 and are responsible for
the planning, maintenance, and compliance associated with stormwater drainage systems. Within the
City limits there are regional and local MS4 facilities, including roads with drainage systems, municipal
streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drain pipes designed for
collecting and carrying stormwater.
The project site is located in a western portion of the Oasis/Valley Floor Stormwater Master Plan area,
which was prepared as part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater Master Plan Project (Master
Plan). In the Master Plan, Dike No. 4 is described as existing stormwater infrastructure established the
United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) to protect the valley floor areas north of Avenue 65 from
the regional flooding. The plan indicates that Dikes No. 2 and No. 4 are certified by FEMA. The
Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan does not identify any improvements or new facilities
associated with Dike No. 4. The nearest proposed regional channel occurs at the intersection of Jackson
Street and Avenue 62, approximately 2.3 miles southeast of the project site.
The proposed development will incorporate on-site storm drain system improvements designed to
capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff through retention facilities corresponding to each on-site
drainage management area. Pertaining to runoff pollution, the on-site storm drain system's detention
system will capture project area runoff in accordance with a WQMP, preventing uncontrolled release
into any public MS4 facilities. 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?
The project site is not located in an area with mapped flood flows, such as FEMA -designated floodways,
nor are there any naturally occurring drainage courses. The site exhibits a relatively flat condition having
resulted from prior agricultural land uses. The only known surface flows are those directly resulting from
rain events and following the shallow elevation gradients. The project allocates space for stormwater
retention facilities sized based on a Master Hydrology Report that factor on- and off-site tributary
conditions, as described in subsections (ii) and (iii) above. Flood flows are not present on or around the
project site, such that impedance, obstruction, or redirection would result from project implementation.
Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-26 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation
According to the previously cited FEMA FIRM panels, the entire project site is located in a Zone X
designation, which applies to areas with "reduced flood risk due to levee". The levees include Dike No.
2 and Dike No. 4 located west and upgradient of the project site. These flood control facilities are
maintained by CVWD as part of their 590 -square mile flood protection coverage area. As such, the
proposed development will not occur in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), where the risk of inundation
is considered to be higher. The proposed storm drain system will meet the local MS4 and City
requirements by including the properly sized conveyance systems and meeting the design criteria of
existing retention facilities, such that it meets the local hydrologic requirements.
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. Although the project is not
located in any mapped seiche zones, such as those associated with large bodies of water, the proposed
development will include a recreational wave feature. The Wave Machine will be capable of creating
mechanical waves in excess of 6 feet tall and the dissipation of that energy is calculated into the sloped
edges. The facility will include sufficient freeboard, such that no water will escape the edges of the
machine limits. According to the project's Professional Civil Engineer, Michael S. Rowe, there is no
naturally occurring seismic or atmospheric event capable of generating seiche waves matching or
exceeding the wave generation levels factored into the facility design. All structural elements of the wave
facility will be certified with structural engineering calculations during the building permit process to
account for the anticipated seismic activity at this location and ensure the ability to safely withstand
seismic wave forces. Through this design, water oscillations generated by seismic events will also be
properly handled and contained to prevent releases of water or potential inundation impacts. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated.
Risk Release of Pollutants: 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. The proposed Wave Basin will include
adequate levels of chemical treatment and filtration to meet public health requirements but such
treated water will not include hazardous levels of any chemicals, and will be fully maintained within the
Wave Basin itself. Moreover, project operations will involve the use of pollution prevention source
control measures under the Final WQMP. These measures include restrictions to prevent contact
between potential pollutants and stormwater facilities, including inlets, conveyances, and retention
areas. As summarized in Table 4.9-1 and subsection cii of this section, the Wave Basin and all proposed
on-site retention basins are designed with sufficient capacity and freeboard to adequately contain the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-27 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
controlling 100 -year storm event, thus preventing ponding and other uncontrolled drainage conditions
that could allow for pollutant releases.
Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
e. Conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan
As discussed above, the project proponent is required to implement a project -specific 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. The WQMP, as described above, includes
guidelines for facility maintenance, pool water drainage, and other operations aimed at complying with
local surface water quality requirements. The WQMP will incorporate grading, hydrology, and other
plans to document the site design, source controls, and treatment controls with a required operation
and maintenance program to comply with water quality objectives. Moreover, the project's storm water
retention facilities will ensure that urban runoff is recharged into the ground via infiltration.
The findings of the WSA/WSV determined that there will be sufficient water supplies to meet the
demands of the proposed project, and future demands of the project, plus all forecasted demands in the
next 20 years. This is based on the volume of water available in the aquifer, CVWD's Colorado River
contract supply, water rights and water supply contracts, and CVWD's commitment to eliminate
overdraft and reduce per capita water use in CVWD's service area. CVWD has committed sufficient
resources to further implement the primary elements of the 2010 CVWMP Update and 2015 UWMP,
which includes the full utilization of imported water supplies, purchase of additional water supplies,
water conservation, and source substitution. The groundwater basin has a storage capacity of
approximately 28.8 million AF, simulating the benefit of a very large reservoir and is capable of meeting
the water demands of the Coachella Valley for extended normal and drought periods. 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.
4.9.5 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project will be required to implement stormwater management through the
implementation of NPDES permit standards. Flooding resulting from the increase in impervious surfaces
created by the project will be controlled through a system of 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-28 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
the same requirements for water quality management and on-site retention for all projects, in order to
prevent cumulative hydrology impacts. 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 to retain the 100 year storm on-site.
4.9.6 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
4.9.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are necessary.
4.9.8 Resources
1. Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Master Hydrology Report, MSA Consulting, January of 2021
2. Coral Mountain Project -Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, MSA Consulting,
June 1, 2020
3. Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification, Coral Mountain Specific Plan, MSA
Consulting. Approved in its revised form on September 29, 2020.
4. City of La Quinta Master Drainage Plan, March 2009, available at
https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8523/635338594527270000
5. City of La Quinta General Plan 2017, Flooding and Hydrology Section of the Environmental
Hazards Element (Chapter 4), February 2013, available at
https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/33565/636340814687270000
6. Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan, part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater
Master Plan, April 2015, available at http://www.cvwd.org/374/Eastern-Coachella-Valley-
Stormwater-Mast
7. Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Environmental Protection Agency, available at
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act
8. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panels
06065C2244H and 06065C2900H effective April 19, 2017, and 06065C2925H, effective March 6,
2018, available at https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
9. Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Plan, available at
http://www.indiosubbasinsgma.org/
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-29 June 2021
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
10. Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Basin Plan), January 2019,
available at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/coloradoriver/water issues/programs/basin planning/docs/
2020/rb7bp e2019.pdf
11. Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the associated
Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, effective June 20, 2013, available at
htt•s: content.rcflood.or: downloads NPDES Documents WW SWMP WQMP Jan2015 A
OS
B MS4Permit.pdf
12. 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan,
December 2018, available at https://dwa.org/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/integrated-
regional-water-management-plan/2019/06/2019 04 03 CVRWMG-Fina120181RWMSWR-
Plan 160437-compressed.pdf
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.9-30 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort
4.10 Land Use and Planning
4.10 Land Use and Planning
4.10.1 Introduction
This section of the Draft EIR addresses potential impacts associated with land use and planning that may
occur with implementation of the proposed project ("project"). The project history related to land use,
existing conditions, and development within the project site are described in this section along with
potential impacts relating to development of the proposed project. The Coral Mountain Resort Specific
Plan, the City of La Quinta General Plan, and the La Quinta Municipal Code were utilized in the analysis
of this land use and planning section.
Prior to the preparation of the Draft EIR, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared. The Coral
Mountain Resort NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. Following the analysis related to land
use and planning in the NOP, threshold topic "a" does not require additional analysis in this Draft EIR.
Would the project physically divide an established community?
Issue areas found to have no impact are further discussed in Section 6.0, Effects Found to have No
Impact, of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this
Draft EIR.
4.10.2 Existing Conditions
The project site is located south of Avenue 58, east and west of Madison Street, and north of Avenue 60,
in the City of La Quinta. The Specific Plan area is located west of Madison Street and encompasses
approximately 386 acres of vacant land. The area east of Madison Street is currently being developed as
Andalusia Country Club and no changes to the proposed land uses for this area are being proposed as a
result of the project. The Specific Plan Amendment, Amendment V to SP 03-097, will continue to develop
as currently allowed, and will have no impact on land use and planning, as it is consistent with the
General Plan and included in its land use map and capacity calculations.
Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is surrounded by developed residential communities and vacant land and open space to
the north, east, and south, vacant land and single-family residences to the south, natural open space to
the west, and Coral Mountain to the southwest. Table 4.10-1, Surrounding Land Uses, shows the land
uses and land use designations of the properties north, south, east, and west of the project property, as
established by the City of La Quinta.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-1 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Table 4.10-1 Surrounding Land Uses
Land Use
Jurisdiction
General PIan1
Zoning2
Existing Use
North
La Quinta
LDR/MHDR/OS-R
RL/RMH/GC
Avenue 58, Vacant Land, Single
Family Residences, Golf Course
South
La Quinta
LDR/OS-N
RL/OS
Avenue 60, Single Family
Residences, Natural Open Space
East
La Quinta
LDR/GC/OS-R
RL/CN/GC
Madison Street, Single Family
Residences, Golf Course, Vacant
Land
West
La Quinta
OS -N
OS
Natural Open Space
Note: 1. LDR = Low Density Residential; MHDR = Medium/High Density Residential; OS -R = Open Space
Recreation; OS -N = Open Space Natural; GC = General Commercial.
2. RL = Low Density Residential; RMH = Medium High Density Residential; CN = Neighborhood Commercial;
GC = Golf Course, OS = Open Space.
Project Site History
The project property was originally included as part of the "Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan", first approved
in 1988 by Riverside County. The Specific Plan area was later annexed to the City of La Quinta. The area
south of Avenue 58 and north of Avenue 60 became known as the "Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific
Plan 03-067" and included areas east and west of Madison Street. Since then, the property has gone
through various entitlement activities and four specific plan amendments as part of the Andalusia at Coral
Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067).
The eastern portion of the previous iteration of the Specific Plan is being developed with the Andalusia
Country Club while the western half has remained vacant. Approval of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific
Plan will establish a new master plan and development standards for the property west of Madison Street
to allow creation of a resort and master -planned community. Concurrently, Amendment V of Specific Plan
03-067 is being processed to remove the western portion such that only the Andalusia Country Club east
of Madison Street will remain in SP 03-067. This will create two separate and distinct communities, "Coral
Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and "Andalusia Country Club", east of Madison Street.
Proposed Project
As previously stated, with the approval of Amendment V of Specific Plan 03-067, the development
portion of the project site would encompass the approximately 386 -acre project area west of Madison
Street. The Specific Plan proposes a variety of land uses consisting of low density residential on
approximately 232.3 acres, general commercial uses on approximately 7.7 acres, tourist commercial uses
on 120.8 acres, and open space uses on approximately 23.6 acres.
In order to allow the development envisioned in the Specific Plan, the project includes a General Plan
Amendment (GPA 2019-0002) and a Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004). Other components of the project
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-2 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
include the above-described Specific Plan Amendment, a Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002), a Tentative Tract
Map (TTM 2019-0005), a Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-0001), and a Development Agreement (DA
2021-0002). The GPA will amend the current General Plan land use designations to reflect the land use
designations required for implementation of Specific Plan 2020-0002, and include General Commercial,
Low Density Residential, Open Space — Recreation, and Tourist Commercial. The ZC will change the
existing zoning of the Specific Plan area to Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, Parks
and Recreation, and Tourist Commercial. The Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) will function as the master
plan governing the allowable land uses, development standards and design guidelines for the project.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map will subdivide the subject property into separate legal lots to facilitate
development of the proposed uses, and the proposed SDP will allow development of the site plan,
architectural designs and landscape plans for the artificial wave basin. The DA will vest the applicant's
right to develop the Coral Mountain Resort project site pursuant to these entitlements, address short-
term rentals within all planning areas of the project, ensure that the project has a net positive fiscal
impact on the City despite the lack of property tax revenue to the City through 2035, and ensure the
timely completion of infrastructure to serve the project and surrounding area.
Existing Land Use Designations
The land use designations currently established for the project property include General Commercial
(CG), Low Density Residential (LDR), and Open Space Recreation (OS -R). Relevant portions of the
definitions for the existing designations, as defined by the La Quinta General Plan, are summarized
below:
General Commercial
The General Commercial designation applies to the majority of commercial land in the City of La Quinta.
Various commercial uses can occur within this designation, ranging from supermarkets and drugstores
in a neighborhood shopping center, to major national retailers in large buildings. General Commercial
uses also include professional offices, service businesses, restaurants, hotels or motels, research and
development and warehousing or similar low impact quasi -industrial projects.
Low Density Residential
The Low Density Residential designation allows up to 4 dwelling units per acre, and is appropriate for
attached or detached single family residential developments. 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-3 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
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.
Proposed Land Use Designations
GPA 2019-0002 will amend the current General Plan land use designations to reflect the land use
designations required for implementation of Specific Plan 2020-0002, and include General Commercial,
Low Density Residential, Recreational Open Space, and Tourist Commercial. Exhibit 4.10-1, Existing and
Proposed Land Use Designations, illustrates the existing and proposed land use designations on the 386 -
acre project site. The land uses are described above, except for the Tourist Commercial designation
which is described below.
Tourist Commercial
The Tourist Commercial land use designation is specifically focused on 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-4 June 2021
Existing Land Use Legend:
Area
±8.4 ac.
Low Density Residential
±204.2 ac.
Open Space (Recreation)
±171.9 ac.
Total
±384.5 ac.
Note: Acreages reflected are approximate, based on the cities'
Existing General Plan Land Use.
Proposed Land Use Legend:
Area
7.7 ac.
Low Density Residential
232.3 ac.
Tourist Commercial
120.8 ac.
Open Space (Recreation)
23.6 ac.
Total
384.4 ac.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
EXISTING & PROPOSED LAND USE
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.10-1
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Existing Zoning Designations
The existing zoning designations for the project property include Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low
Density Residential (RL), and Golf Course (GC). Relevant portions of the definitions for the existing
designations, as defined by the La Quinta Municipal Code, are summarized below:
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.
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.
Golf Course (GC)
GC districts provide for the protection and preservation of golf course open space areas in the City.
Proposed Zoning Designations
The proposed Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004) will revise the existing zoning of the project area from the
existing CN, RL, and GC designations to include CN, RL, Tourist Commercial (CT), and Parks and Recreation
(PR). Exhibit 4.10-2, Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations, illustrates the existing and proposed
zoning designations on the project site. The zones are described above, except for the Tourist
Commercial and Parks and Recreation zones, which are described below.
Tourist Commercial (CT)
CT districts are intended to 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.
Representative land uses include destination resort hotels, conference -oriented hotels and motels,
eating and drinking establishments, accessory retail and personal service shops and recreational uses.
Parks and Recreation (PR)
PR districts are intended to provide for the development and preservation of public and private parks
and associated recreation facilities within open space areas. PR districts apply to parks, recreation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-6 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
facilities (such as driving ranges, club houses and athletic facilities), trails and public and private golf
courses, with approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-7 June 2021
Existing Zoning Legend:
Area
Neighborhood Commercial
±8.4 ac.
Low Density Residential
±204.2 ac.
- ourse
±171.9 ac.
Total
±384.5 ac.
Note: Acreages reflected are approximate, based on the cities'
Existing Zoning.
AVENUE 58
— NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL (CN)
LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (RL)
PARKS
AND
RECREATION (PR)
TOURIST ,
COMMERCIAL (CT)
AVENUE 60
Proposed Zoning Legend:
Area
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
7.7 ac.
Low Density Residential (RL)
232.3 ac.
Tourist Commercial (CT)
120.8 ac.
Parks and Recreation (PR)
23.6 ac.
Total
384.4 ac.
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
EXISTING & PROPOSED ZONING
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.10-2
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.10.3 Regulatory Setting
State
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).
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 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,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-9 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
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 of the
City's vision for its build out. The Land Use Element includes the Land Use Map, 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
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 appropriate places as designated in the general plan, and regulates such land uses and
structures in order to serve the needs of residential neighborhoods, commerce, recreation, open space,
and other purposes.
Per La Quinta Zoning Code, 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.
4.10.4 Project Impacts
Thresholds of Significance
The thresholds for this section are derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, and are used to
determine the level of potential effect. The significance criteria are based on the recommendations set
forth in Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines. For analysis purposes, the proposed project would have
a significant effect on land use and planning if it is determined that the project will:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-10 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. Physically divide an established community?
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 an environmental effect?
Threshold topic "a" is not analyzed further since screening criterion related to surrounding established
communities concluded that there would be no impacts or less than significant impacts. See 4.10.1,
Introduction, of this Land Use and Planning Section.
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 site. The analysis in this Section focusses on the General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, and the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan. The Specific Plan details the
proposed land use of the project and is intended to act as zoning for future development within the
Specific Plan boundary. The establishment of site-specific development standards, land use regulations,
and programs are set forth in the Specific Plan to guide the development of the property 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. The Specific Plan implements all applicable
elements of the General Plan and includes detailed information about the site's master plan and
infrastructure improvements.
Project Design Features
The project proposes the development of a mixed-use project consisting of residential, commercial,
resort, and open space uses on approximately 386 acres. The proposed project areas and their
associated components are listed below:
Planning Area I — Neighborhood Commercial
• 60,000 square feet of publicly accessible neighborhood commercial building space
Planning Area 11— Low Density Residential
• 496 single family attached and detached dwellings and affiliated amenities permitted within Low
Density Residential land use designations.
o Low Density Residential product types may include estate compounds, single-family
detached/attached units, alley loaded homes, and clustered products.
Planning Area 111— Tourist Commercial
• 104 resort residential units
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-11 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
o Resort residential product types may include single family detached units, townhomes,
and stacked flats.
• 150 -key resort with customary resort amenities
o The Resort Hotel will provide a hospitality component, with amenities such as a
restaurant and bar, retail shop, meeting space, swimming pool, fitness center, spa and
lodging.
o Lodging options will provide a range of traditional hotel rooms, suites and casitas.
• 57,000 square feet of resort -serving commercial and recreational building space
o Residents and guests of the property will have exclusive use of resort commercial.
• The Wave Basin
16.62 -acre artificial surf Wave Basin
o Residents and guests of the property will have exclusive use of the Wave Basin
o Equipment and service space for the Wave Basin includes
■ Two approximately 6,000 -square -foot wench areas, each having:
• 1,900 -square -foot wench buildings
• 2,800 -square -foot shade structures
■ 37,500 -square -foot Service Yard, including:
• 2,400 -square -foot Maintenance Workshop
• 2,400 -square -foot Water Treatment building
• 0.5 -million -gallon (MG) Water Tank
o The project applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at this
location involving attendance of not -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day, for up to 4 days (up
to 4 events per year).
• 26.5 acres of graded area, south of the Wave Basin
o Providing unprogrammed gathering and staging space for temporary equipment,
portable toilets, shade structures, tenting for inclement weather, and catering
equipment.
Planning Area IV — Open Space Recreation
• Approximately 24 acres of natural open space for low -impact active and passive recreation
activities.
o Include hiking, biking, and ropes courses.
Offsite Improvements
Project implementation will also include the installation of an off-site transformer bank at the existing
Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58. Construction for the conduits
and line extension would occur in the existing right-of-way.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-12 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Entitlements
The project includes:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA): The GPA will amend the current General Plan land use designations
from General Commercial, Low Density Residential, Open Space — Recreation, to Neighborhood
Commercial, Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space — Recreation (See Exhibit
4.10-1, Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations).
• Zone Change (ZC): The ZC will revise the existing zoning of the Specific Plan Area from Neighborhood
Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Golf Course, to Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low
Density Residential (RL), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Tourist Commercial (CT) (See Exhibit 4.10-2,
Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations).
• Specific Plan (SP): The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will be adopted as the master plan
governing the allowable land uses, development standards and design guidelines for the project.
• Tentative Tract Map (TTM): The TTM subdivides the property into smaller lots for development. The
TTM will subdivide all of Planning Area III (PA III), The Wave Resort, and the western corner of PA II
into lots suitable for the development of the uses permitted for these areas in the Specific Plan.
Future TTMs may be filed with each phase of development as necessary to implement the balance
of the project.
• Site Development Plan (SDP): The SDP is required by the City for final approval of landscape design,
architectural design, and site plan to establish the location, architectural design and landscape plan
for the Wave Basin along with associated mechanical equipment and improvements (Planning Area
III -B). Future SDPs will be filed with each phase of development as necessary to implement the
balance of the project.
• Development Agreement (DA): The proposed Development Agreement would vest the applicant's
right to develop the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan area pursuant to the entitlements described
above, address short-term rentals within all planning areas of the project, ensure that the project
has a net positive fiscal impact on the City despite the lack of property tax revenue to the City through
2035, and ensure the timely completion of infrastructure to serve the project and surrounding area,
and ensure that the project design features and mitigation measures identified in this EIR are
enforceable by the City as project requirements.
Future entitlements for the project -specific components will also include:
• Conditional Use Permit (CUP): Allowable uses that require a CUP shall be processed in accordance
with Section 9.210.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
• Temporary Use Permit (TUP): TUPs are required by the City to accommodate special, unique, or
limited duration activities that might otherwise be outside the provisions of normal zoning. These
could include temporary clubhouse(s), special events or other uses and activities. Temporary uses
are anticipated and allowed by the Specific Plan.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-13 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Project design features and their compliance with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code are
analyzed in the subsequent discussion of project impacts.
Project Impacts
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-density residential,
commercial, open space/recreational and resort uses on a currently vacant site. The existing General
Plan land use designations include Low Density Residential, General Commercial and Open Space
Recreational. The current zoning designations for the project site include Low Density Residential (RL),
Neighborhood Commercial (CN), and Golf Course (GC). 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 from General Commercial, Low Density Residential, Open Space — Recreation,
to Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, Tourist Commercial, and Open Space —
Recreation. The ZC will revise the existing zoning of the Specific Plan Area from Neighborhood
Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Golf Course, to Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density
Residential (RL), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Tourist Commercial (CT). Table 4.10-2 and 4.10-3
(below) and Exhibits 4.10-1 (Existing and Proposed Land Use) and Exhibit 4.10-2 (Existing and Proposed
Zoning) displays the existing and proposed land use designations and zoning, respectively. Discussion of
project consistency with the City General Plan and Zoning designations is provided below.
Table 4.10-2 Existing and Proposed Land Use
Existing Land Use
Proposed Land Use
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Open Space — Recreational
Open Space — Recreational
General Commercial
General Commercial
Tourist Commercial (Resort)
Table 4.10-3 Existing and Proposed Zoning
Existing Zoning
Proposed Land Use
Low Density Residential (RL)
Low Density Residential (RL)
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Golf Course (GC)
Tourist Commercial (CT)
Parks and Recreation (PR)
Along with the GPA and ZC, the project is requesting approval of a Specific Plan, a Tentative Tract Map
(TTM), Site Development Permit (SDP), and Development Agreement (DA). The Specific Plan is a
regulatory document which, if adopted by the City Council of La Quinta, serves as the site-specific zoning
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-14 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
document for the project, including the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting
infrastructure, as well as development standards and regulations for uses within the project. The Coral
Mountain Resort Specific Plan, if adopted, would act as the master plan governing the allowable land
uses, development standards and design guidelines for the project. The TTM subdivides the property
into smaller lots for development. The TTM will subdivide all of Planning Area III, the Wave Resort, and
the western corner of PA II into lots suitable for the development of the uses permitted for these areas
in the Specific Plan. The SDP provides landscape design, architectural design, and site plan to establish
the location, architectural design and landscape plan for the Wave Basin along with associated
mechanical equipment and improvements (Planning Area III -B). The DA establishes an agreement
between the developer and the City that allows the project to be developed while securing benefits for
the City and the public as described in more detail above.
La Quinta General Plan Consistency Analysis
As shown in Table 4.10-2 and Exhibit 4.10-1, the existing General Plan land use designations at the
project site include Low Density Residential, General Commercial and Open Space Recreational. Low
Density residential allows for single family residential developments, whether attached or detached.
General Commercial allows for commercial uses ranging from supermarkets and drugstores in a
neighborhood shopping center, to major national retailers in large buildings, to offices, service
businesses, restaurants, hotels or motels, research and development and warehouses. Open Space
Recreation uses allow for parks, driving ranges, club houses, athletic facilities, and public and private golf
courses.
The project proposes a GPA to change the land use designations to Low Density Residential, Open Space
Recreation, General Commercial and Tourist Commercial. The Low Density Residential, Open Space
Recreation and General Commercial 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. The number of residential units allowed by the proposed project
will be consistent with those allowed under the current General Plan and SP 03-067, resulting in similar
low intensity residential development. The General Commercial land use designation and Neighborhood
Commercial zoning designation occur in the same area as currently allowed in the General Plan and
Zoning maps. However, the project proposes to include approximately 120.8 acres of Tourist Commercial
at the site. Tourist Commercial land use designations are intended for tourism -related land uses, such as
resort hotels, hotels and motels, and resort commercial development.
An analysis of applicable goals, policies and programs contained in the General Plan was conducted. The
findings of that analysis are summarized below.
Land Use
• Goal LU -1: Land use compatibility throughout the City.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-15 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• Goal LU -2: High quality design that complements and enhances the City.
• Policy LU -2.1: Changes and variations from the Zoning Ordinance in a Specific Plan will be
offset by high quality design, amenities and mix of land uses.
• Goal LU -5: A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City.
• Policy LU -5.2: Consider changes in market demand in residential product type to meet the
needs of current and future residents.
• Goal LU -6: A balanced and varied economic base which provides a broad range of goods and
services to the City's residents and the region.
• Policy LU -6.2: Maintain commercial development standards in the Zoning Ordinance
including setbacks, height, pad elevations and other design and performance standards that
assure a high quality of development.
• Policy LU -6.3: Support and encourage the expansion of the resort industry as a key
component of the City's economic base.
Consistency: The site components (neighborhood commercial, low density residential, resort residential,
resort hotel, resort amenities, recreational amenities, and open space) are compatible with surrounding
residential, open space, and neighborhood commercial uses and designations. Lands to the north of the
project and south of Avenue are designated Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential.
Development of these lands would be governed by the City's zoning standards, and would consist of
attached or detached single family residential developments (two to four units per acre for Low Density
Residential), and medium density neighborhoods (four to eight units per acre). This development is
expected to be consistent with and similar to the uses proposed within the project because the project
proposes a maximum of 496 low density residential housing units on approximately 232.3 acres, as well
as a maximum of 104 resort residential units, on approximately 40.5 acres, which would be similar to
the density and intensity of development allowed under the General Plan. The project is separated from
adjacent uses by surrounding arterial streets and physical topographic barriers, such as Coral Mountain.
Off-site development includes the connection to an existing Imperial Irrigation District (IID) substation
to provide electricity to the project site. The off-site improvements would not impact land use of the off-
site areas.
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan includes detailed design guidelines in Section 4 of the SP to
guide high-quality development throughout the Specific Plan area. The project includes both
neighborhood commercial and tourist commercial land uses which will generate revenue and create
employment opportunities. The proposed project would increase services associated with tourism and
neighborhood commercial uses.
The project proposes housing of varying types and sizes with access to resort and recreational amenities,
thus enhancing housing choices for potential buyers. Planning Areas II and III will offer a broad range of
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-16 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
housing options on the site. Planning Area II, designated as Low Density Residential, anticipates detached
or attached residential dwelling units with densities ranging from 0.8-4 dwelling units per acre. Planning
Area III proposes the development of resort residential dwelling units with densities ranging from 2.5-
2.8 dwelling units per acre.
Consistent with Policy LU -5.2, Goal LU -6, and Policy LU -6.3, the implementation of the Tourist
Commercial land use designation and the associated development of a recreational facility and hotel will
promote the continued growth of the tourism and resort industries in La Quinta by providing resort,
recreational, commercial, and residential land uses on the 386 -acre property. Additionally, the
residential uses will incrementally increase demand for commercial goods and services in the region,
thus enhancing the economy.
Circulation
• Goal CIR-1: A transportation and circulation network that efficiently, safely and economically
moves people, vehicles, and goods using facilities that meet the current demands and
projected needs of the City.
• Policy CIR-1.12: As a means of reducing vehicular traffic on major roadways and to reduce
vehicle miles traveled by traffic originating in the City, the city shall pursue development of a
land use pattern that maximizes interactions between adjacent or nearby land uses.
• Goal CIR-2: A circulation system that promotes and enhances transit, alternative vehicle,
bicycle and pedestrian networks.
• Policy CIR-2.2: Encourage reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by reducing vehicle
miles traveled and vehicle hours of delay by increasing or encouraging the use of alternative
modes and transportation technologies, and implement and manage a hierarchy of Complete
Street multimodal transportation infrastructure and programs to deliver improved mobility
and reduce GHG emissions.
• Policy CIR-2.3: Develop and encourage the use of continuous and convenient pedestrian and
bicycle routes and multi -use paths and places of employment, recreation, shopping, schools,
and other high activity areas with potential for increased pedestrian, bicycle, golf cart/NEV
modes of travel.
Consistency: The project proposes a private circulation system to provide safe and efficient passage for
pedestrians and motorists throughout the site. The project proposes a multi -modal circulation system,
aiming to decrease automobile dependency by providing transportation facilities for a variety of user
groups including motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers of electric vehicles. The project proposes a
private circulation system that will safely accommodate both vehicles and pedestrians with shared low -
speed, low-volume internal streets. The multi -modal transportation system will consist of off-street
bicycle and pedestrian paths/routes, sidewalks in higher traffic areas, enhanced pedestrian/bicycle
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-17 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
crosswalks, pedestrian and multi -use paths and streets, traffic calming methods, short street segments
with frequent caution zones and stopping points, golf cart and other alternative forms of personal
transportation.
Livable Community
• Goal SC -1: A community that provides the best possible quality of life for all its residents.
Consistency: The project includes elements to address the goal of the Livable Community Element, which
is intended to assist the City in developing a more united community through resource conservation,
built environment enhancement, promotion of alternative forms of transportation, and improvement of
community health. The project and Specific Plan are consistent with this goal by promoting a high-quality
mix of uses that will contribute to the built environment, promote walkability in the resort center of the
project, and provide opportunities for active recreation.
Economic Development
• Goal ED -1: A balanced and varied economic base which provides fiscal stability to the City,
and a broad range of goods and services to its residents and the region.
• Policy ED -1.1: The Land Use Element shall maintain a balance of land use designations to
address economic needs, meet market demand, and assure a wide range of development
opportunities.
• Goal ED -2: The continued growth of the tourism and resort industries in the City.
Consistency: The project proposes a resort with up to 150 hotel keys, a water-based active recreation
amenity, and resort residences that will expand tourism opportunities and promote fiscal stability.
Additionally, the residential use will incrementally increase demand for commercial goods and services
in the region, thus enhancing the economy. The project promotes the continued growth of the tourism
and resort industries in La Quinta by providing resort, recreational, commercial, and residential land uses
on the 386 -acre property.
Parks, Recreation and Trails
• Goal PR -1: A comprehensive system of parks, and recreational facilities and services that
meet the active and passive needs of all residents and visitors.
• 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-18 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Consistency: The project designates areas set aside for recreational open space uses, as well as a water-
based active recreational amenity that will provide recreational opportunities currently not available in
the City. Additional open space will be scattered throughout PA II. Planning Area IV proposes
approximately 23.6 acres of land zoned for Parks and Recreation (PR). This Planning Area will include
active and passive recreational activities such as hiking trails, biking routes, and a ropes course/zipline.
Housing
• Goal H-1: Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City's existing
and projected population.
• Policy H-1.1: Identify adequate sites to accommodate a range of product types, densities, and
prices to address the housing needs of all household types, lifestyles, and income levels.
• Goal H-4: Conserve and improve the quality of existing La Quinta neighborhoods and
individual properties.
• 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: The project proposes the development of up to 600 attached and detached dwelling units
with densities ranging from 0.8-4 dwelling units per acre, thus contributing to the City's market rate
housing stock. The project will complement the surrounding residential communities. Development of
resort, neighborhood commercial, recreational open space, and residential uses will add value and
amenities to neighboring communities and the City. The project promotes water conservation through
the use of drought tolerant plant materials and water efficient irrigation techniques. The project will
comply with all City and water district regulations and building codes for water conservation, energy
efficiency, and building standards. The project will also comply with all applicable green building
requirements.
Water Resources
• Goal WR -1: The efficient use and conservation of the City's water resources.
• Policy WR -1.1: Support the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) in its efforts to supply
adequate domestic water to residents and businesses.
• Policy WR -1.3: Support CVWD in its efforts to expand tertiary treated (i.e. reclaimed) water
distribution.
Consistency: The project promotes water conservation through the use of drought tolerant plant
materials and water efficient irrigation techniques. The project will comply with all City and Coachella
Valley Water District (CVWD) regulations and building codes for water conservation. Additionally,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-19 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
recycled water will be used for common area irrigation for landscaping. The Wave Basin provides a
recreational amenity to support the proposed resort and residential uses, and does so with substantially
less water demand than required for alternatives amenities, such as an 18 -hole golf course. This is
discussed in more detail in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR.
Open Space and Conservation
• Goals 0S-1: Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and
scenic resources for enhanced recreational, environmental, and economic purposes.
• Policy OS -1.1: Identify and map lands suitable for preservation as passive and active open
space.
• Policy 05-1.2: Continue to develop a comprehensive multi-purpose trails network to link open
space areas.
Consistency: The project includes significant open space amenities, including the protection of Coral
Mountain through an Environmentally Sensitive Area. The project incorporates connections to the public
sidewalk and public trail system for convenient walking, jogging, and biking activities. Planning Area IV
proposes approximately 23.6 acres of Open Space Recreation land uses, in which low -impact active and
passive activities, such as hiking, biking and ropes courses are permitted. PA IV will be retained largely
as natural desert land. The perimeter pedestrian improvements will connect to the surrounding
community. However, the project will not connect to existing trails or open space areas, outside of the
project boundary, because there are no existing public trails in the immediate vicinity of the project.
Noise
• Goal N-1: A healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and resort
character.
• Policy N-1.1: Noise standards in the City shall be consistent with the Community Noise and
Land Use Compatibility scale described in the Noise Element.
• Policy N-1.2: New residential development located adjacent to any roadway identified in
Table IV -4 (in the Noise Element of the GP) as having a buildout noise level in excess of 65
dBA shall continue to be required to submit a noise impact analysis in conjunction with the
first Planning Department application, which demonstrates compliance with the City's noise
standards.
• Policy N-1.3: New non-residential development located adjacent to existing residential
development, sensitive receptors or residentially designated land, shall be required to submit
a noise impact analysis in conjunction with the first Planning Department application, which
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-20 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
demonstrates that it will not significantly impact the adjacent residential development or
residential land.
• Policy N-1.5: All noise impact analysis will include, at a minimum, short-term construction
noise and noise generated by the daily operation of the project at build out.
Consistency: The project establishes residential, resort residential, resort, recreational, and
neighborhood commercial uses with compatible noise levels in an existing residential area. These uses
maintain and enhance the City's residential and resort character and will be subject to the City's noise
ordinance. Noise levels on Avenue 58 and Madison Street are not excessive due to the low traffic
volumes, and the project will be buffered by a perimeter community wall. A Noise Impact Analysis was
completed for the project site which determined that short-term construction impacts, and long-term
project operational impacts will be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures
during project construction. The potentially significant noise impacts and measures to mitigate those
impacts are analyzed in more detail in Section 4.11, Noise, as well as in the Noise Impact Analysis
(Appendix L).
Soils and Geology
• Goal GEO-1: Protection of the residents' health and safety, and of their property from
geologic and seismic hazards.
• Policy GEO-1.2: The City shall continue to require that development in areas subject to
rockfall, landslide, liquefaction and/or other geotechnical hazards described in the Soils and
Geology Element, prepare a detailed geotechnical analysis that includes mitigation measures
intended to reduce potential hazards to less than significant levels.
• Policy GEO-1.4: The City shall require that all new structures be built in accordance with the
latest adopted version of the Building Code.
Consistency: A project -specific geotechnical investigation was conducted for the proposed project. The
Geotechnical Investigation evaluated the engineering properties of the subsurface materials and
provided engineering recommendations and design criteria for the site preparation, foundation design,
and the design of various site improvements. Mitigation for the project is outlined in Section 4.6,
Geology and Soils, of this Draft EIR.
Flooding and Hydrology
• Goal FH -1: Protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the community from flooding and
hydrological hazards.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-21 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• Policy FH -1.3: The City shall continue to implement development standards that provide for
a reduction in runoff from developed lands and are consistent with local and regional
stormwater management plans.
Consistency: During construction and operation, project implementation 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.
During the life of the project, water quality standards and waste discharge requirements will be met
through the compliance of the NPDES permit program for post -construction conditions. The project
proponent must 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, all of which are programs under
the NPDES and CWA framework. For the on-site conditions, stormwater will be accepted in retention
facilities that may include traditional surface retention basins, underground retention facilities, the wave
and lake system for storage. These improvements shall be sized sufficiently to contain the stormwater
volume resulting from the controlling 100 -year storm event.
The wave facility will be subject to adequate water treatment and filtration measures to meet or exceed
the local public health requirements. Occasional water pool drainage for maintenance operations will be
conveyed to one of the on-site retention basins, therefore preventing off-site discharge. The project's
potential flooding and hydrology impacts, including potential impacts to water quality, are analyzed in
more detail in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR.
Hazardous Materials
• 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.
Consistency: The project will implement best management practices during construction and operation
of the proposed project. During construction, the implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) will be required at the site, in compliance with Construction General Permit (CGP) (Order
No. 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). Per the CGP, the project's
SWPPP shall include comprehensive handling and management procedures for building materials,
especially 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 shall be stored
indoors or under cover whenever possible or in areas with secondary containment. The designation of
staging areas for activities such as fueling vehicles, mixing paints, plaster, mortar, and so on, is also
required to be determined in the SWPPP.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-22 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Project implementation includes the operation of residential, commercial, recreational, and resort uses.
The nature of these uses is not expected to involve, as a primary activity, the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials. Except as described below, the handling, application, and storage of
cleaning agents, building maintenance products, paints, solvents and other related substances would
not be present in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety, or the
environment.
The proposed Wave basin will use water disinfecting and cleaning materials in large quantities for the
operation and maintenance of the surf water feature. The proposed project will require the storage or
handling of hazardous materials, as defined in Chapter 8.64 of the Riverside County Municipal Code
including pool disinfecting and cleaning supplies, and shall be required to follow the procedures
established in the Municipal Code and Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code (HSC). The project's
potential impacts relating to hazardous materials are analyzed in more detail in Section 4.8, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, of this Draft EIR.
Emergency Services
• Goal ES -1: An effective and comprehensive response to all emergency service needs.
• Policy ES -1.2: New development proposals shall continue to be routed to the Fire Department
to assure that project access and design provide for maximum fire and life safety.
Consistency: The Fire Department will review the proposed project access points, to ensure adequate
access for emergency vehicles. For gated projects, the Fire Department requires the installation of a
Knox -Box Rapid Entry System or similar device to facilitate emergency access by fire fighters and other
emergency responders.
Prior to construction, both the Fire Department and Police Department will review the project site plan,
and individual sub -area plans as they are brought forward, to ensure safety measures are addressed,
including emergency access. The project will be reviewed by City, Police and Fire officials to ensure
adequate fire service and safety as a result of project implementation. The project's potential impacts
relating to the provision of emergency services are analyzed in more detail in Section 4.13, Public
Services, of this Draft EIR.
Water, Sewer and Other Utilities
• Goal UTL-1: Domestic water facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and
long-term needs of the City.
• Policy UTL-1.1: The City should coordinate with CVWD to assure that sufficient water supplies
are available to sustain current and future development.
• Policy UTL-1.2: The City should encourage the conservation of water.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-23 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• Goal UTL-2: Sanitary sewer facilities and services which adequately serve the existing and
long-term needs of the City.
• Policy UTL-2.1: All new development should be required to connect to sanitary sewer service.
Consistency: CVWD provides water and sanitary sewer services to the City of La Quinta. The project
proposes to connect to existing water and sewer facilities. A Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply
Verification (WSA/WSV) was prepared for the proposed project to analyze water use and availability for
project operation. The project specific WSA/WSV was approved by CVWD. The project's potential
impacts relating to utilities are analyzed in more detail in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of
this Draft EIR.
Specific Plan Consistency with the General Plan
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan includes the construction and operation of a mixed-use
development consisting of Low Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial
(Resort), and Open Space Recreation land uses. The Specific Plan's consistency with the City General Plan
is further discussed in Chapter 6 of the Specific Plan (General Plan Consistency). This Chapter of the
Specific Plan outlines the various goals and policies within each relevant General Plan Element, and
explains the SP's consistency within each goal or policy.
Zoning Consistency
The existing zoning for the project is Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL), and
Golf Course (GC). CN zones allow small-scale commercial uses (i.e. food, drugs, sundries, and personal
services) to support neighborhood areas. RL zones provide for low density neighborhoods, and GC zones
permit golf courses in open space areas within the City.
The project proposes a Zone Change to change the land use designations to RL, CN, Tourist Commercial
(CT), and Parks and Recreation (PR). The proposed Specific Plan would supersede the current zoning
designations on the project site and act as a developmental guide for the project. The proposed Specific
Plan will set forth the planning areas, land use policies, development standards, and design guidelines
for the proposed project. The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan will address minimum development
densities as shown in Tables 4.10-4 through 4.10-7, below. All development on the project site shall
adhere to the standards and requirements set forth in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan's development
standards vary from the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, as shown below in Tables 4.10-4 through
4.10-7. However, as shown in the tables, the variations are not substantial, when compared to the
existing standards within the La Quinta Municipal Code. Title 9, Zoning, of the La Quinta Municipal Code
was consulted in order to compare the development standards proposed for the Coral Mountain Resort
project with the existing standards established for the City of La Quinta. Title 9 and development
standards associated with Residential Districts, Nonresidential Districts, and Special Purpose Districts
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-24 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
(which include open space zones) were utilized to determine whether project development would result
in significant impacts.
PA 1: Neighborhood Commercial
Table 4.10-4 PA 1 Development Standards
Neighborhood Commercial
Max/Min
Municpal Codes
Max. Structure Height
35 ft1,2
35
Max. No. of Stories
2
2
Min. Front Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Min. Rear Setback
10 ft
10 ft
Min. Parking
1/250 ft GFA.
1/250 ft GFA
Max. Building Floor Area in PA 1
60,000 SF
25 %6
Min. Building Setback to Avenue 58
25 ft
30 ft
Min. Building Setback to Madison Street
25 ft
30 ft
Min. Setback from Interior Property Line3
0 ft
0 ft
Min. Building/Landscape Setback from Residential PA4
40 ft/20 ft
40 ft/20 ft
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
6 ft
Max. Light Pole Height
25 ft
8 ft
Notes:
1. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
2. Architectural and roof projections, such as chimneys, spires, finials and similar features not providing
habitable or otherwise unusable space shall be permitted to extend up to fifteen feet above the maximum
structure height.
3. Mechanical equipment to have a minimum 3- foot setback from interior property lines.
4. Landscape setback occurs within the building setback.
5. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA I, compared to the
development standards in CN Zones as established in Section 9.90.040 (Table 9-6) of the La Quinta
Municipal Code.
6. 25 % of Planning Area I is 1.9 acres (7.7 acres x 25%). The property proposes a building floor area of 60,000
square feet, which is approximately 1.4 acres of the site.
As demonstrated in Table 4.10-4, the proposed project would not result in a significant change to the
City's established Municipal Code development standards in Neighborhood Commercial zones. Per Table
4.10-4, the project's Neighborhood Commercial use would allow 25 -foot light poles, which is an increase
of 17 feet in height compared to the 8 -foot pole height allowed by the Municipal Code. The 25 -foot poles
in the Neighborhood Commercial area would allow for the illumination of parking and pedestrian areas
for security purposes in the evening hours. They will be similar to those found in parking lots of shopping
centers, which consist of low -lit, downward -oriented fixtures that avoid spillage on adjacent properties.
PA 11: Low Density Residential
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-25 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Table 4.10-5 PA II Development Standards
Low Density Residential
Detached
Product
Attached
Product
Accessory
Buildingl
Municipal
Code
Min. Lot Size
3,600 sf
3,600 sf
--9
7,200 sf
Max. Structure Height
32 ft 2,3
32 ft 2,3
28 ft 2,3
28 ft
Max. No. Of Stories
2
2
2
2
Min. Area Per Unit 4
1,400 sf
1,000 sf
250 sf
1,400 sf
Min. Front Setback 5
10 ft
10 ft
Garage —10 ft
Other Structures -3 ft.
20 ft
Min. Rear Setback
5 ft
5 ft
2 ft
20 ft
Min. Front/Side Facing Attached
Garage (Carport) Setback 8
15 ft/3 ft 5
15 ft/3 ft 5
--
25 ft
Min. Interior/Corner Side Yard
Setback
5 ft / 5 ft
5 ft 6 / 5 ft
5 ft' / 5 ft
5 ft/10 ft
Min. Building To Building Setback'
0 ft
0 ft
0 ft
--
Max. Wall Height
6 ft
6 ft
6 ft
6 ft
Max. Parking Required
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
space
--
2 garage
spaces plus
0.5 guest
spaces
Notes:
1. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
2. Height is limited to 22' within 150' of the Madison & Avenue 58 R.O.W.
3. Excluding chimneys, porticos other incidental architectural features etc. may exceed max. structure height
by up to 5 feet.
4. AC units, trellis elements, pools, and spas are allowed to encroach into side and rear setback areas within 3'
of property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Subject to applicable building code requirements
7. Min. garage and accessory structure setbacks reduced to 0 ft for alley loaded and cluster products.
8. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared to the
development standards in RL Zones as established in Section 9.50 (Table 9-2 in Section 9.50.030) of the La
Quinta Municipal Code.
9. -- = Not Applicable
As demonstrated in Table 4.10-5, the proposed project would not result in a significant change to the
City's established Municipal Code development standards for Low Density Residential zones, and to the
extent there are variations, such variations will occur internal to the project site and are not anticipated
to have any off-site impacts. Per Table 4.10-5, the minimum lot size allowed in PA II is 3,600 square feet,
compared to 7,200 square feet allowed by the Municipal Code. The project proposes a reduced
residential lot size in the planning area to allow for the project's open space uses, recreational, and resort
amenities (i.e., resort commercial uses and the Wave Basin feature), which will be accessible to the
residents of the project. The reduced lot size was established to allow for the open space, recreational,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-26 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
and resort uses proposed for the project, and to concentrate the more dense residential and resort areas
in the center of the site while maintaining larger lots adjacent to the perimeter of the site to remain
consistent with the surrounding developments.
PA 111: Tourist Commercial
Table 4.10-6 PA III Development Standards
Tourist Commercial
III -A
III -B
III -C
III -D
III -E
III -F
III -G
Municipal
Code 9
Min. Lot Size (sf)
20,000
20,000
20,000
3,600
3,600
20,000
20,000
--
Max. Lot Coverage
50%
10%
70%
70%
70%
50%
70%
25%
Min. Lot Frontage (ft)
25'
25'
25'
30'
30'
25'
25'
10 ft
Min. Livable Areal (sf)
--
--
--
1,400
1,400
--
--
1,400
Min. Accessory
Building Area 2 (sf)
--
--
--
300
300
Min. Front Setback
10'
0'
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
Min. Setback from
Walk Streets Or
Sidewalks 3
5'
0'
5'
5'
5'
5'
--
--
Min. Setback from
Wave Basin (ft)
0'
0'
0'
0'
0'
Min. Front Facing
Garage/Carport
Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
--
Min. Side Facing
Garage/Carport
Setback
--
--
--
12'
12'
--
--
--
Min. Rear Setback4
--
--
--
5'
5'
--
25'
0'
Min. Interior/Corner
4 s s
Side Setback
--
--
--
3'/3'
3'/3'
Min. Setback from
Low -Density
Residential District (ft)
--
50'
15'
--
--
--
50'
30'
Max. Height 789
(stories/ft)
40/4
45/4
40/3
30/3
30/3
40/3
30/2
40/3
Min. Bldg. Separation9
6'
0'
15'
6'
6'
6'
0'
10'
Max Pole Light Height
25'
80'
25'
--
--
40'
40'
8'
Max. Wall Height
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
6'
Min. Parking Provided
1.1 per
key
25
employee
spaces
1 per
500 sf
1 per
bedroom
1 per
bedroom
1 per
500 sf
1 per
1,000 sf
1 per 300
sf GFA
Min. Parking
Dimension
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
9'x19'
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-27
June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Notes:
1. Excluding garages, casitas or carriage units
2. Detached garages/carports, casitas, carriage house units
3. Where walk street occurs at rear or side property line, walk street setback shall govern.
4. AC units and other mechanical equipment may encroach within setback up to 3' from property line.
5. 0' setback allowed for products, such as duplexes or zero lot line units, that share a common wall.
6. Excluding chimneys, porticos and other incidental architectural features.
7. Including rooftop deck and terraces (e.g. railings, parapets, furniture, shade structures, umbrellas, stairs,
access lifts, elevator housings, etc.).
8. Subject to applicable building code requirements.
9. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared to the development
standards in CT Zones as established in Section 9.90 (Table 9-6 in Section 9.90.040) of the La Quinta Municipal
Code.
Additional Notes: III -A = Resort; III -B = The Wave; III -C = Wave Club; III -D = Resort Residential West; III -E = Resort
Residential East; III -F = The Farm; III -G = Back of House. -- = Not Applicable
As demonstrated in Table 4.10-6, the proposed project would not result in a significant change to the
City's established Municipal Code development standards in Tourist Commercial zones, and to the extent
there are variations, those variations are internal to the project site would be approved by the City
Council as part of the overall Specific Plan and Zone Change, thus avoiding any conflicts or inconsistencies
between the Project and applicable zoning. Per Table 4.10-6, the project's Tourist Commercial use would
allow 25 -foot light poles in PA III -A and III -C, 40 -foot light poles in PA III -F and III -G, and 80 -foot light
poles in PA III -B. Currently, the Municipal Code allows 8 -foot pole heights in this use. Similar to the
Neighborhood Commercial zone, the 25 -foot and 40 -foot light poles in the Tourist Commercial area
would allow for the illumination of parking and pedestrian areas for security purposes in the evening
hours. They will be similar to those found in parking lots of shopping centers, which consist of low -lit,
downward -oriented fixtures that avoid spillage on adjacent properties. The 80 -foot light poles in PA III -
B are proposed to surround the 16.62 -acre Wave Basin feature. The light fixtures will be downward -
facing, and oriented to illuminate the Wave Basin. The fixtures will be located and oriented to avoid
spillage onto adjacent properties (see Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of this Draft EIR for analysis of the light
fixtures proposed in PA III).
PA IV: Open Space Recreation/Parks and Recreation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-28 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Table 4.10-7 PA IV Development Standards
Parks and Recreation
Max./Min.
Municipal Code'
Min. Building Site
--
--2
Min. Lot Frontage
--
--
Max. Structure Height
12 ft
28 ft
Max. Height - Ropes Course/Zipline
50 ft
--
Max. Height — Other Recreational Equipment
20 ft
--
Max. Building Coverage in PA IV
5,000 sf
--
Max. Number of Stories
1
2
Min. Setback from Property Line
10 ft
0 ft
Notes:
1. This column compares the project's proposed development standards in PA II, compared to
the development standards in PR Zones as established in Section 9.130 (Table 9-9 in Section
9.130.010) of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. -- = Not Applicable
As demonstrated in Table 4.10-7, the proposed project would not result in a significant change to the
City's established Municipal Code development standards in Open Space zones.
Specific Plan Consistency with Zoning Code
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan sets forth the planning areas, land use policies, development
standards, and design guidelines for the proposed project. The Specific Plan, if adopted by the City
Council of La Quinta, acts as a regulatory document which serves as the site-specific zoning document
for the project, including the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting infrastructure,
as well as development standards and regulations for uses within the project. All development on the
project site shall adhere to the standards and requirements set forth in the Specific Plan, and as
demonstrated above, those standards will not substantially differ from the Zoning Ordinance.
Off -Site Improvements
Off-site improvements include the installation of an off-site transformer bank at the Imperial Irrigation
District (IID) Avenue 58 Substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58. The off-site improvements will extend
a distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed along Avenue 58 as part of the
proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right of
way and within the existing IID yard.
The existing IID substation is designated in the City of La Quinta's Major Community Facilities land use
and zoning designation. This land use designation is assigned to existing and planned municipal,
educational, or public facilities, including utility facilities and buildings. The proposed connection to the
existing IID substation is consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations. The off-site
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-29 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
improvements will not change the existing designations; therefore, off-site development impacts are
anticipated to be minimal.
Surrounding Areas
Properties in proximity to the project consist of a mix of developed and undeveloped lands. General Plan
land uses surrounding the project include Low Density Residential to the north, east, and south, General
Commercial to the northeast, Medium Density Residential to the north and southeast, Open Space
Recreation to the north, east, and southeast, Open Space Natural to the west and south, and Major
Community Facilities approximately 500 feet south (CVWD percolation ponds). The current zoning
designations in the surrounding area include Low Density Residential (RL) to the north, east and south,
Medium High Density Residential (RMH) to the north and southeast, Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to
the northeast, Golf Course (GC) to the north, northeast, east, and southeast, Open Space (OS) to the
south, Parks and Recreation (PR) to the west and south. RL properties south -adjacent to 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 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 presented in this discussion, the project will be consistent with the
goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. The Specific Plan will result in changes to development
standards, but as demonstrated above, those changes will not be substantial. Impacts will be less than
significant.
4.10.5 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for the analysis of cumulative impacts on land use consists of each project area
and the immediate vicinity around each of these sites 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 site would be consistent and compatible with existing and planned land uses surrounding the
project site, 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 Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, the project
would be consistent with applicable goals and policies in the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. The
project will provide neighborhood commercial uses in proximity to existing and proposed residential
communities in the southern portion of the City. Residential homes in the project site will be consistent
with the existing gated -residential communities in the surrounding area, including Andalusia Country
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-30 June 2021
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Club to the east. The resort and resort amenities are consistent with the City's policy to support and
encourage the expansion of the resort 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.
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 effect 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 impacts.
4.10.6 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
4.10.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are necessary.
4.10.8 Resources
1. La Quinta General Plan, Chapter II, Land Use Element, accessed 2020.
2. La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, Zoning, accessed 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.10-31 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.11 Noise
4.11 Noise
4.11.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing acoustic setting at the project site and in the vicinity and evaluates
the potential noise exposure that could result from build -out of the Coral Mountain Resort project.
Information for this section was obtained from the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis
("Noise Study"), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., March 2021 (Appendix K.1), The Wave at Coral
Mountain Noise Memorandum ("Noise Memo"), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. April 2021
(Appendix K.2), and Chapter IV, Environmental Hazards, Noise Element of the La Quinta General Plan,
as well as the City's Municipal Code. Prior to the preparation of the Draft EIR, a Notice of Preparation
(NOP) was prepared using Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form, in the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Appendix G assesses the potential impacts associated with noise at
the project property. The Coral Mountain Resort NOP is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR.
Following the screening criterion related to noise in the NOP, the following does not require
additional analysis in this Draft EIR.
For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels:
- The project site is located approximately 19 miles southeast of Palm Springs International
Airport, and 4.25 miles west of the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport. Therefore, the project
site is not located within two miles of a public airport or the vicinity of a private airstrip, and
as such, no impact related to the exposure of people residing or working in the project area
to excessive airport related noise levels is anticipated.
Issue areas identified as having no impacts are further discussed in Chapter 6.0, Effects Found to have
No Impact of this Draft EIR. Please consult Chapter 9.0 for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in
this Draft EIR.
4.11.2 Existing Conditions
Existing Noise Environment
The development area of the project encompasses approximately 386 acres of the overall 929 -acre
project area, located in the southeastern portion of the City of La Quinta. The local area is
characterized as a developing area with a number of golf course and residential communities to the
north, west, east, south and southeast, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south, and open
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-1 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
space and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment
Facility to the south.
To assess the existing noise level environment, ten 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at
sensitive receiver locations near the project. The receiver locations were selected to describe and
document the existing noise environment within the project study area (indicated in Exhibit 4.11-1,
Noise Measurement Locations). To fully describe the existing noise conditions, noise level
measurements were collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on Wednesday, October 16th, 2019.
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 levels at each noise level measurement location determined that daytime
energy average noise levels (dBA Leq) ranged from 43.8 dBA Leq to 62.5 dBA Leq; while the nighttime
noise level ranged from 39.9 dBA Leq to 60.7 dBA Leq. The lowest noise level measurements occurred
at the western end of Avenue 60 (L8 in Exhibit 4.11-1); while the highest measurements occurred on
Avenue 58, near the Madison Street intersection (L2 in Exhibit 4.11-1). This is discussed in greater
detail in Section 4.11.4, Existing Noise Level Measurements, of this Noise Section.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-2 June 2021
LEGEND:
Q Measurement Locations
N.T.S.
��► URBAN
CROSSROADS
MSA CONSULTING, INC
> PLANNING> CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
7603209811 msaconsultinginc.com
NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.11-1
4.11 NOISE
Proposed Project
The proposed project includes a Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map, and Site Development Permit
leading to the development of a mix of uses including 496 low density residential units on
approximately 232.3 acres, an artificial Wave basin is proposed on approximately 16.62 acres, a full-
service resort hotel (up to 150 keys), 104 resort residential units, 57,000 square feet of resort
commercial uses on approximately 120.8 acres, 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses
on 7.7 acres, and open space recreational uses on 23.6 acres.
4.11.3 Regulatory Setting
To limit population exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging as well as intrusive noise
levels, 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 regulation of stationary sources is left to local agencies.
Federal
Noise Control Act of 1972
The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control
Act of 1972, which serves three purposes:
1. Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce;
2. Assist state and local abatement efforts; and
3. Promote noise education and research.
The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) originally was tasked with implementing
the Noise Control Act. However, it was eventually eliminated, leaving other federal agencies and
committees to develop noise policies and programs. Some examples of these agencies are as follows:
The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its
various agencies. The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is responsible to regulate noise from aircraft and
airports. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible to regulate noise from the
interstate highway system. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible
for the prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) prepared the Criteria for
Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure which established a construction -related
noise level threshold. A division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, NOISH
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-4 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
identifies a noise level threshold based on the duration of exposure to the source. The construction -
related threshold starts at 85 dBA for more than eight hours per day, and for every 3 dBA increase,
the exposure time is cut in half. This results in noise level thresholds of 88 dBA for more than four
hours per day, 92 dBA for more than one hour per day, 96 dBA for more than 30 minutes per day, and
up to 100 dBA for more than 15 minutes per day.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires hearing protection be provided
by employers in workplaces where the noise levels may, over long periods of exposure to high noise
levels, endanger the hearing of their employees. Standard 29 (Labor) of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 1910 indicates the noise levels under which a hearing conservation program
is required to be provided to workers exposed to high noise levels.
State
State of California Noise Requirements
The State of California regulates freeway noise, sets standards for sound transmission, provides
occupational noise control criteria, identifies noise standards, and provides guidance for local land
use compatibility. State law requires that each county and city adopt a General Plan that includes a
Noise Element which must be prepared per guidelines adopted by the Governor's Office of Planning
and Research. The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of the community to
excessive noise levels. The City of La Quinta Noise Element is included in the City's General Plan. In
addition, CEQA requires that all known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including
environmental noise impacts.
California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control
The California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was established in 1973
to develop regularity tools to control and abate noise for use by local agencies. One significant model
is the "Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix". The matrix allows the
local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental levels of
noise.
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. 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-5 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
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. For new residential buildings, schools, and hospitals, the acceptable interior
noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.
Regional and Local
Riverside County General Plan
Since the City of La Quinta does not identify specific construction vibration level standards, the County
of Riverside General Plan Noise Element Policy N 16.3 vibration standards were use 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, the County of Riverside identifies a vibration perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec. The
County of Riverside vibration standard of 0.01 in/sec in RMS velocity levels 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 has adopted an Environmental Hazards Element (Chapter IV), Noise, of the
General Plan which identifies areas where noise levels are expected to reach unacceptable levels, and
provides policies and programs which will assure that noise levels do not negatively impact the
community. The Noise Element specifies the maximum exterior and interior noise levels for new
developments impacted by transportation noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports,
and railroads. To minimize noise impacts to noise -sensitive land uses, the Element has established
Policy N-1.1 to identify noise standards consistent with the Land Use Compatibility for Community
Noise Environments for various land uses. The City's Noise Element also provides several policies to
minimize noise impacts from transportation, such as Policy N-1.2, which requires a noise study and
any necessary mitigation measures for new developments along roadways where the noise levels are
in excess of 65 dBA CNEL.
The noise criteria identified in the City of La Quinta Noise Element are guidelines to evaluate the land
use compatibility of transportation related noise. The compatibility criteria provide the City with a
planning tool 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 as Table 4.11-1. 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 uses are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 65 dBA CNEL and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-6 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
conditionally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 70 dBA CNEL. For conditionally acceptable
land use, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the
noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the
design.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-7 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-1 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments
Land Uses
CNEL
(dBA)
50
55
6o
65
70
75
80
Residential - Single Family Dwellings,
Duplex, Mobile Homes
;
[r [[
n
Residential - Multiple Family
1r 1n
Transient Lodging: Hotels and Motels
1[ [
School Classrooms, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes and
Convalescent Hospitals
W/
1[ [
n
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters
:::c
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports4:444+.10:44+:4401:44444+++++.r:
#
l I` [
[
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
//
[
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water///////////
Recreation, Cemeteries
i [ 1
n
%.ems%%/////+
Office Buildings, Business, Commercial and
Professional
k'
n
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture
,
/
'a 14M
Source: California Department of Health Services, "Guidelines for the Preparation and
Content of the Noise Element of the Genera! Plan," 1990
Normally Acceptable: With no special noise reduction requirements assuming standard
construction.
•
C
Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after
a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation
features included in the design
Normally Unacceptable: New construction is discouraged. If new construction does proceed, a
detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise
insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-8 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Based on the City of La Quinta land use compatibility guidelines and Policy N-1.2, the project -specific
Noise Study was prepared to satisfy the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level criteria in outdoor living
areas, and an interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL consistent with the State of California Building
Code.
La Quinta Municipal Code
The La Quinta Municipal Code established standards to mitigate noise impacts from construction
activities. To control noise impacts associated with the construction of the proposed project, the City
has established limits to the hours of operation. These are summarized in Table 4.11-2, Construction
Hours, below.
Table 4.11-2 Construction Hours
Jurisdiction
Municipal
Code
Section
Permitted Hours of
Construction Activity
Construction
Noise Level
Standards
La Quinta
6.08.050
October 1st to April 30th
7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Mondays to Fridays
May 1st to September 30th
6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Mondays to Fridays
n/a
All Year: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m Saturdays; no activity Sundays
and holidays
"n/a" = The City of La Quinta does not specify specific construction noise level standards.
4.11.4 Project Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
According to the CEQA Guidelines' Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether noise
impacts are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated.
Would the project:
a. 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. Generation of excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-9 June 2021
4.11 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 are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. Table
4.11-3, Typical Noise Levels, presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective
loudness and effects.
Table 4.11-3 Typical Noise Levels
COMMON OUTDOOR
ACTIVITIES
COMMON INDOOR
ACTIVITIES
A - WEIGHTED
SOUND LEVEL dBA
SUBJECTIVE
LOUDNESS
EFFECTS OF
NOISE
THRESHOLD OF PAIN
140
SPEECH
INTERFERENCE
NEAR JET ENGINE
130
INTOLERABLE OR
120
DEAFENING
/ET FLY -OVER AT 300m (1000 ft)
ROCK BAND
110
VERY NOISY
`
LOUD AUTO HORN
100
GAS LAWN MOWER AT lm (3 ft)
90
DIESEL TRUCK AT 15m (50 ft),
at 80 km/hr (50 mph)
FOOD BLENDER AT 1m (3 ft)
60
NOISY URBAN AREA, DAYTIME
VACUUM CLEANER AT 3m (10 ft)
70
LOUD
HEAVY TRAFFIC AT 90m (300 ft)
NORMAL SPEECH AT 1m (3 ft)
60
QUIET URBAN DAYTIME
LARGE BUSINESS OFFICE
50
MODERATE
SLEEP
DISTURBANCE
QUIET URBAN NIGHTTIME
THEATER, LARGE CONFERENCE
ROOM (BACKGROUND)
ao
QUIET SUBURBAN NIGHTTIME
LIBRARY
30
FAINT
NO EFFECT
QUIET RURAL NIGHTTIME
BEDROOM AT NIGHT, CONCERT
HALL (BACKGROUND)
20
BROADCAST/RECORDING
STUDIO
10
VERY FAINT
LOWEST THRESHOLD OF HUMAN
HEARING
LOWEST THRESHOLD OF HUMAN
HEARING
0
Source: Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Exhibit 2-A, Urban Crossroads, March 2021 (Appendix K.1).
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 4.11-
1 (above), 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.
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). Equivalent sound levels
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-10 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in A -
weighted decibels (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
(7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (sleeping) hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 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 of La Quinta relies on the 24-hour CNEL level to assess land use
compatibility.
Sound Propagation
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The way noise
reduces with distance depends on the following factors:
Geometric Spreading
Sound from a stationary point source propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound
level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source.
Highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path and hence can be treated as a
line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source
propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Unlike a point
source, a line source's sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance.
Ground Absorption
The propagation path of noise from a highway to a receptor is usually very close to the ground. Noise
attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling adds to the attenuation associated
with geometric spreading. Traditionally, the excess attenuation has also been expressed in terms of
attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually sufficiently accurate for distances
of less than 200 feet. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the
source and the receptor, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is
assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface
between the source and the receptor such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess
ground attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to
the cylindrical spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB
per doubling of distance from a line source.
Atmospheric Effects
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-11 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm
conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels can be increased
at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) due to atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e.,
increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and
turbulence can also have significant effects.
Shielding
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate
noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of
the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Shielding by trees and other such
vegetation typically only has an "out of sight, out of mind" effect. That is, the perception of noise
impact tends to decrease when vegetation blocks the line -of -sight to nearby residences.
Noise Control
Noise control is the process of obtaining an acceptable noise environment for an observation point
or receptor by controlling the noise source, transmission path, receptor, or all three. This concept is
known as the source -path -receptor concept. In general, noise control measures can be applied to
these three elements.
Noise Barrier Attenuation
Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA, cutting the loudness of traffic noise
in half. A noise barrier is most effective when placed close to the noise source or receptor. Noise
barriers, however, do have limitations. For a noise barrier to work, it must be high enough and long
enough to block the path of the noise source.
Land Use Compatibility with Noise
Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals, churches,
and residences are more sensitive to noise intrusion than are commercial or industrial developments
and related activities. As ambient noise levels affect the perceived livability of a neighborhood or
community, so too can the mismanagement of noise impacts impair the economic health and growth
potential of a community by reducing the area's desirability as a place to live, shop and work. For this
reason, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the
planning and design process. The FHWA encourages State and local government agencies to regulate
land development in such a way that noise -sensitive land uses are either prohibited from being
located adjacent to a highway, or that the developments are planned, designed, and constructed in
such a way that noise impacts are minimized.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-12 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Community Response to Noise
Surveys have shown that about 10 percent of the people exposed to traffic noise of 60 dBA will report
being highly annoyed with the noise, and each increase of one dBA is associated with approximately
2 percent more people being highly annoyed. When traffic noise exceeds 60 dBA or aircraft noise
exceeds 55 dBA, people may begin to complain. Despite this variability in behavior on an individual
level, the population can be expected to exhibit responses to changes in noise levels as shown in
Table 4.11-4, Noise Level Increase Perception. An increase or decrease of 1 dBA cannot be perceived
except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments; a change of 3 dBA is considered "barely
perceptible;" and changes of 5 dBA are considered "readily perceptible."
Twice as Loud
Readily Perceptible
Barely Perceptible
Just Perceptible
Table 4.11-4 Noise Level Increase Perception
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Source: Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Exhibit 2-8, Urban Crossroads, March 2021 (Appendix K.1).
Exposure to High Noise Levels
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sets legal limits on noise exposure in the
workplace. The permissible exposure limit (PEL) for a worker over an eight-hour day is 90 dBA. The
OSHA standard uses a 5-dBA exchange rate. This means that when the noise level is increased by 5-
dBA, the amount of time a person can be exposed to a certain noise level to receive the same dose is
cut in half. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recommended that
all worker exposures to noise should be controlled below a level equivalent to 85 dBA for eight hours
to minimize occupational noise induced hearing loss. NIOSH also recommends a 3-dBA exchange rate
so that every increase by 3-dBA doubles the amount of the noise and halves the recommended
amount of exposure time.
Further, periodic exposure to high noise levels in short duration, such as construction, is typically
considered an annoyance and not impactful to human health. It would take several years of exposure
to high noise levels to result in hearing impairment.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-13 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Vibration
Per the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment,
vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration
of room surfaces is called structure -borne noise. 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). Vibration sources may be
continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne
sound, ground -borne vibrations 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. The PPV is most
frequently used to describe vibration impacts to buildings but is not always suitable for evaluating
human response (annoyance) because it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration
signals. Instead, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude often described as the
root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of
the signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration on the human body. Decibel
notation (VdB) is commonly used to measure RMS. Decibel notation (VdB) serves to reduce the range
of numbers used to describe human response to vibration. Typically, ground -borne vibration
generated by man-made activities attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration.
Sensitive receivers for vibration include structures (especially older masonry structures), people
(especially residents, the elderly, and sick), and vibration -sensitive equipment and/or activities.
The background vibration -velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Ground -borne
vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration -
velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly
perceptible levels. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground -borne vibration are construction
equipment, steel -wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the ground -
borne vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is
the typical background vibration -velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where
minor damage can occur in fragile buildings. Table 4.11-5, Typical Levels of Ground -Borne Vibration,
shows common vibration sources and the human and structural response to ground -borne vibration.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-14 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-5 Typical Levels of Ground -Borne Vibration
Human/Structural Response
Velocity Typical Sources
Level* (50 ft from source)
Threshold. minor cosmetic damage
fragile buildings
Difficulty with tasks such as
reading a VDT screen
Residential annoyance. infrequent
events (e.g. commuter rail)
Residential annoyance, frequent —*-
events
-Fevents (e.g. rapid transit)
Limit for vibration sensitive
equipment. Approx. threshold for
human perception of vibration
90
80
70
s0
50
-4-- Blasting from construction projects
- Bulldozers and other heavy tracked
construction equipment
�--- Commuter rail, upper range
~ Rapid transit, upper range
-I— Commuter rail. typical
- Bus or truck over bump
- Rapid transit, typical
- Bus or truck, typical
- Typical background vibration
' RMS Vibration Velocity Level in VdB relative to 10-6 incheslsecond
Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment.
Noise Impact Analysis
A project -specific Noise Impact Analysis (referred to as "Noise Study" herein), provided by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. in May 2020 (Amended in March 2021), was conducted to determine the noise
exposure and the necessary noise mitigation for the development of the proposed project. In order
to determine project -related construction noise impacts, the Noise Study evaluated construction of
the project in three phases. The phases are described below.
• Phase 1 (2021) includes the resort (wave basin, hotel uses, and 57,000 square feet of resort
commercial uses), 104 attached dwelling units, 26 detached dwelling units, and 10,000 square
feet of retail.
• Phase 2 (2023) adds 25,000 square feet of retail.
• Phase 3 (2026) adds 470 detached dwelling units and 25,000 square feet of retail.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-15 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
To assess the off-site transportation CNEL noise level impacts associated with development of the
proposed project, noise contours were developed based on the project -specific Traffic Impact
Analysis, also prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix L.1). 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 the following traffic scenarios:
Existing Without/With Project:
This scenario refers to the 2019 noise conditions, without and with the development of the full project
(Phase 3). The Existing With Project scenario will not actually occur since the project would not be
fully constructed and operational until Phase 3 (2026) conditions. The Existing Without Project serves
as the baseline for analysis.
Existing plus Ambient (EA) Without / With Project:
This scenario refers to the 2019 noise conditions plus the estimated 7 years of background growth in
ambient traffic conditions without and with the development of the full project (Phase 3).
Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) 2021 Without / With Project:
This scenario refers to the existing plus ambient plus cumulative noise conditions in 2021 without and
with the proposed project Phase 1. Project Phase 1 includes the 12 -acre wave basin facility (12.12 -
acre water body, 16.62 basin footprint), a 150 -key hotel, 104 multifamily attached dwelling units,
57,000 square feet of resort commercial ancillary uses, 26 single family detached dwelling units, and
10,000 square feet of retail.
Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) 2023 Without / With Project:
This scenario refers to the existing plus ambient plus cumulative noise conditions in 2023 without and
with the proposed project Phase 2. In addition, to project Phase 1, project Phase 2 includes an
additional 25,000 square feet of retail for a total of 12 -acre wave basin facility (water body footprint
= 12.14 acres), a 150 -key hotel, 104 multifamily attached dwelling units, 57,000 square feet of resort
commercial uses, 26 single family detached dwelling units, and 35,000 square feet of retail.
Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) 2026 Without / With Project:
This scenario refers to the existing plus ambient plus cumulative noise conditions in 2026 without and
with the proposed project at buildout. In addition, to project Phase 1 and 2, project Phase 3 includes
an additional 25,000 square feet of retail and 470 single family detached dwelling units for a total of
12 -acre wave basin facility, a 150 -key hotel, 104 multifamily attached dwelling units, 57,000 square
feet of resort commercial uses, 496 single family detached dwelling units, 60,000 square feet of retail.
Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative (EAC) 2026 Special Events:
This scenario refers to the existing plus ambient plus cumulative plus special events noise conditions
in 2026 at project buildout. The applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-16 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
this location involving attendance of not -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day arriving or departing on
Saturdays (up to 4 events per year).
General Plan (GP) 2040 Without / With Project:
This scenario refers to the future General Plan buildout conditions at Year 2040 without and with the
proposed project. This scenario represents buildout of the General Plan land use and includes all
cumulative projects identified in the project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis.
Significance Criteria
The Noise Study utilized various resources to determine significance criteria for project -related
construction and operational activities.
Noise -Sensitive Receivers
Per the project -specific Noise Study, noise level increases resulting from the project were evaluated
at the closest sensitive receiver locations. Under the CEQA Guidelines, consideration must 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. This
approach recognizes that there is no single noise increase that renders the noise impact significant.
There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or of the
corresponding human reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. This is primarily due to the wide
variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and differing individual experiences with noise. Thus,
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 to be used for the assessment of the project -generated increases in
noise levels that consider the ambient noise level. The FICON recommendations are based on studies
that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by aircraft noise.
Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts,
these recommendations are often used in environmental noise impact assessments involving the use
of cumulative noise exposure metrics, such as CNEL.
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 may be exceeded. Therefore, for
this analysis, FICON identifies a readily perceptible 5 dBA or greater project -related noise level
increase as a significant impact when the noise criteria for a given land use is exceeded. Per FICON, in
areas where the "without project" noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA, a 3 dBA barely perceptible
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-17 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
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 if the noise criteria for a given land use is exceeded, since it
likely contributes to an existing noise exposure exceedance. Table 4.11-6 provides a summary of the
potential noise impact significance criteria, based on guidance from FICON.
Table 4.11-6 Significance of Noise Impacts at Noise -Sensitive Receivers
Without Project Noise Level
Potential Significant Impact
< 60 dBA
5 dBA or more
60 - 65 dBA
3 dBA or more
> 65 dBA
1.5 dBA or more
Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON), 1992.
Substantial Temporary or Periodic Noise Level Increases
Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol's 12 dBA Leq substantial noise level increase threshold is used
in this analysis 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.
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 is adopted
from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
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 land use.
Criteria for Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure, provided by NOISH, was also
utilized in the preparation of the Noise Study. NOISH identifies a noise level threshold based on the
duration of exposure to the source, as described above. For the purpose of this analysis the lower,
more conservative threshold of 85 dBA Leq is used as an acceptable threshold for construction noise
at the nearby sensitive receiver locations. Since this construction -related noise level threshold
represents the energy average of the noise source over a given time, they are expressed as Leq noise
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-18 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
levels. Therefore, the noise level threshold of 85 dBA Leq over a period of eight hours or more is used
to evaluate the potential project -related construction noise level impacts at the nearby sensitive
receiver locations.
Construction Vibration Standards
The project -specific 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 4.11-7, Vibration
Source Levels for Construction Equipment.
Table 4.11-7 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
Source: Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Table 6-6, Urban
Crossroads, March 2021 (Appendix K.1).
The City of La Quinta 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
Noise impacts shall be considered significant if any of the following occur as a direct result of the
proposed development.
Off -Site Traffic Noise
• When the noise levels at existing and future noise -sensitive land uses (e.g. residential, etc.):
o are less than 60 dBA CNEL and the project creates a 5 dBA CNEL or greater Project -
related noise level increase; or
o range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL and the project creates a 3 dBA CNEL or greater Project -
related noise level increase; or
o already exceed 65 dBA CNEL, and the project creates a community noise level increase
of greater than 1.5 dBA CNEL (FICON, 1992).
On -Site Traffic Noise
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-19 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
• If the on-site exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL at the private outdoor living areas of
residential homes, or common outdoor areas at hotel uses. Interior noise levels shall not
exceed 45 dBA CNEL for residential homes and the hotel building (La Quinta Municipal Code,
Ordinance 550, Section 9.100.210 (B) & General Plan Noise Element Policy N-1.2).
Operational Noise
• If project -related operational (stationary -source) noise levels:
o exceed the exterior 65 dBA Leq daytime or 50 dBA Leq nighttime noise level standards
for residential and hotel land uses (City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Ordinance 550,
Section 9.100.210 (B) & (C));
• If the existing ambient noise levels at the nearby noise -sensitive receivers near the Project
site:
o are less than 60 dBA Leq and the project creates a 5 dBA Leq or greater project -related
noise level increase; or
o range from 60 to 65 dBA Leq and the project creates 3 dBA Leq or greater project -related
noise level increase; or
o already exceed 65 dBA Leq, and the project creates a community noise level increase
of greater than 1.5 dBA Leq (FICON, 1992).
Construction Noise & Vibration
• If project -related construction activities create noise levels which exceed the 85 dBA Leq
acceptable noise level threshold at the nearby sensitive receiver locations (NIOSH, Criteria for
Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure).
• If short-term project generated construction vibration levels exceed the County of Riverside
vibration standard of 0.01 in/sec RMS at sensitive receiver locations (County of Riverside
General Plan Noise Element, Policy N 16.3).
The significance criteria outlined above is summarized in Table 4.11-8, Significance Criteria Summary.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-20 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-8 Significance Criteria Summary
Analysis
Receiving
Land Use
Condition(s)
Significance Criteria
Daytime
Nighttime
Off Site 1
Traffic Noise
Noise
Sensitive
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
On -Site
Traffic Noise
Exterior Noise Level Criteria
65 dBA CNEL
Interior Noise Level Standard
45 dBA CNEL
Operational
Noise3
Exterior Noise Level Standards
See Table 3-1.
if ambient is < 60 dBA Leq
>_ 5 dBA Leq Project increase
if ambient is 60 - 65 dBA Leq
>_ 3 dBA Leq Project increase
if ambient is > 65 dBA Leq
>_ 1.5 dBA Leq Project increase
Construction4
Noise Level Threshold
85 dBA Leq
n/a
Vibration Level Threshold
0.01 in/sec RMS
n/a
'Source: FICON, 1992.
2 Sources: City of La Quinta General Plan Noise Element & California Building Code.
'Sources: City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Section 6.08.050 (Appendix 3.1) and FICON guidance.
4 Sources: NIOSH, Criteria for Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure and 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
Existing Noise Level Measurements
To assess the existing noise level environment, ten 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at
sensitive receiver locations near the project. The receiver locations were selected to describe and
document the existing noise environment within the project study area (Exhibit 4.11-1, Noise
Measurement Locations). To fully describe the existing noise conditions, noise level measurements
were collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on Wednesday, October 16th, 2019.
Measurement Procedure and Criteria
In order to describe the existing noise environment, Urban Crossroads measured hourly noise levels
during typical weekday conditions over a 24-hour period. By collecting individual hourly noise level
measurements, it is possible to describe the daytime and nighttime hourly noise levels and calculate
the 24-hour CNEL. The long-term noise readings were recorded using Piccolo Type 2 integrating sound
level meter and dataloggers. The Piccolo sound level meters were calibrated using a Larson -Davis
calibrator, Model CAL 150. All noise meters were programmed in "slow" mode to record noise levels
in "A" weighted form. The sound level meters and microphones were equipped with a windscreen
during all measurements. All noise level measurement equipment satisfies the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) standard specifications for sound level meters ANSI S1.4-2014/IEC 61672-
1:2013.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-21 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
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. See Exhibit 4.11-2.
Sensitive Receiver Locations
For the purpose of the project -specific Noise Study, ten 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 facade, whichever is closer to the project site.
The nearest receptor where an individual can stay for a 24-hour period is represented by R7 at
approximately 37 feet south of the project site 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 4.11-2 displays the receiver locations used in the Noise Study and explained below. As
demonstrated in Exhibit 4.11-2, the offsite project receivers are indicated as R1 through R10, and the
onsite project receiver locations are indicated as P1 through P10.
R1: Located approximately 154 feet north of the project site, R1 represents existing
residential homes north of 58th Avenue. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near
this location, L1, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R2: Location R2 represents the existing residential homes located north of the project site
at roughly 181 feet, on the north side of 58th Avenue. A 24-hour noise measurement
was taken near this location, L2, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R3: Location R3 represents the existing residential homes northeast of the intersection at
58th Avenue and Madison Street at approximately 231 feet from the project site. A 24-
hour noise measurement near this location, L3, is used to describe the existing ambient
noise environment.
R4: Location R4 represents the existing residential homes southeast of the intersection at
58th Avenue and Madison Street at approximately 185 feet from the project site. A
24-hour noise measurement near this location, L4, is used to describe the existing
ambient noise environment.
R5: Location R5 represents the existing residential homes on the east side of Madison
Street at approximately 352 feet from the project site. A 24-hour noise measurement
was taken near this location, L5, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R6: Location R6 represents the existing residential home located north of Calle Conchita
about 134 feet from the project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near
this location, L6, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-22 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
R7: Location R7 represents the existing residential homes located north of Avenue 60
about 37 feet from the project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this
location, L7, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R8: Location R8 represents the existing residential homes located south of Avenue 60
about 38 feet from the project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this
location, L8, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R9: Location R9 represents the existing residential homes located about 1,451 feet west
of the project site along Quarry Ranch Road. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken
near this location, L9, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R10: Location R10 represents the existing residential homes located about 1,378 feet
northwest of the project site north of 58th Avenue. A 24-hour noise measurement
was taken near this location, L10, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
In addition, the unmitigated exterior noise levels at the property line located approximately 200 feet
east of the Wave Basin are estimated at 59.3 dBA Leq, which is below the City's daytime noise limit of
65 bDA. There are currently no outdoor living areas or receivers near this location.
Existing Noise Measurement Results
As previously discussed in Section 4.11.2, Existing Conditions, of this Noise Section, the noise
measurements presented in the project -specific Noise Study focus on the average or equivalent sound
levels (Leq). Table 4.11-9, 24 -Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements, identifies the hourly daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise levels at each noise level
measurement location shown in Exhibit 4.11-1, Noise Measurement Locations. Table 4.11-9 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-23 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-9 24 -Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements
Location'
Description
Energy Average Noise
Level (dBA Leq)2
CNEL
Daytime
Nighttime
L1
Located on 58th Ave. in front of entrance to
Coral Mountain and west of Salida del Sol.
54.2
51.5
58.5
L2
Located on 58th Ave. south of home at 57925
Barristo Cir.
62.5
60.7
67.6
L3
Located northeast of Madison St. and 58th Ave.
adjacent to wall enclosing golf course.
61.2
55.6
63.6
L4
Located on the southeast corner of 58th Ave,
and Madison St.
54.5
53.2
60.1
L5
Located south of 58th Ave. outside northwest
corner of the Andalusia Country Club.
59.7
56.1
63.3
L6
Located on Calle Conchita southeast of home at
80900 Calle Conchita.
58.7
55.8
63.0
L7
Located on 60th Ave. north of gated entrance to
single family homes.
57.9
56.1
63.1
L8
Located towards the western end of 60th Ave.
south of home at 80800 60th Ave.
43.8
39.9
47.3
L9
Located on Jefferson St. north of Quarry Ln.
51.7
48.9
56.0
L10
Located on 58th Ave. slightly east of 58th Ave.
and Stone Creek Way intersection.
61.9
54.2
63.3
See Exhibit 5-A for the noise level measurement locations.
2 Energy (logarithmic) average levels. The long-term 24-hour measurement worksheets are included in Appendix 5.2.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Construction Noise Standards
The City's General Plan and Municipal Code do not establish numeric maximum acceptable
construction source noise levels at potentially affected receivers. Therefore, the FTA noise level
threshold of 85 dBA Leg is used as a reasonable threshold to evaluate the potential project -related
construction noise level impacts at the nearby sensitive receiver locations.
Construction Activities
Project construction equipment will include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers,
and portable generators. Noise generated by the construction equipment operating simultaneously
can reach high levels when combined. The number and mix of construction equipment are expected
to occur in the following stages:
• Site Preparation
• Grading and Horizontal Development
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-24 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
The construction noise analysis was prepared using reference noise level measurements taken by
Urban Crossroads to describe the typical construction activity noise levels for each stage of project
construction. The construction reference noise level measurements represent a list of typical
construction activity noise levels. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range
from approximately 68 dBA to more than 80 dBA when measured at 50 feet. However, these noise
levels diminish with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance.
For example, a noise level of 80 dBA measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receiver would
be reduced to 74 dBA at 100 feet from the source to the receiver and would be further reduced to 68
dBA at 200 feet from the source to the receiver.
Construction Reference Noise Levels
Noise generated by the project construction equipment will include a combination of dozers, graders,
scrapers, trucks, power tools, rock mixers, and portable generators. Noise levels generated by heavy
construction equipment can range from approximately 68 dBA to more than 80 dBA when measured
at 50 feet.
Construction impacts to offsite and onsite receivers were analyzed in the project -specific Noise Study.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-25 June 2021
•
Planning Area II
Future
Low Density Residential (3)
Planning Area 11 r
low Density Residential (1)
Planning Area 11
Future
Low Density Residential (2)
Pluming Area 11
Future
Law Dewily Residential (4)
Planning Areo II
Future
low Density Resldenfal (51
Planning Attu 14
Ope•t Space
—
PI
IR
Planning Areo 111
Resod (6)
60TH AVE
—14
LEGEND: LEGEND:
ei Project Receiver Locations
ce Receiver Locations
Existing 6 -Foot High Barrier
4044
0 Ft
N.T.S.
Surf Lagoon/Wave Machine
Outdoor/Pool/Spa Activity
Outdoor Activity
Neighborhood Commercial
L�► URBAN
CROSSROADS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
NOISE SOURCE AND RECIEVER LOCATIONS
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.11-2
4.11 NOISE
Future Traffic Noise Environment
The following models were used in the project -specific Noise Study to estimate and analyze the future
traffic noise environment. Methods and procedures are consistent with Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) land use/noise compatibility standards, all transportation related noise levels are
presented in terms of the 24-hour CNEL's.
Federal Highway Administration Traffic Noise Prediction Model
The estimated roadway noise impacts from 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 K.1.
Traffic Noise Prediction Model Inputs
Consistent with the project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis, also prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc.,
the Noise Study provides off-site roadway segment analysis for the models described above under
Section 6.1.1 (Off -Site Traffic Noise Prediction Model Inputs) of the Noise Study.
Off -Site
Table 4.11-10, Off -Site Roadway Parameters, identifies the 29 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 daily traffic (ADT) volumes used for this study are presented on Table 4.11-11, Average Daily
Traffic Volumes. Table 4.11-12 provides the time of day (daytime, evening, and nighttime) vehicle
splits, and Table 4.11-13 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-27 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-10 Off -Site Roadway Parameters
ID
Roadway
Segment
Location
Adjacent
Land Use2
Distance From
Centerline To Nearest
Adjacent Land Use
(Feet)2
Vehicle
Speed
(mph)3
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
City of La Quinta
GC/LDR
64'
55
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
City of La Quinta
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
64'
55
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
City of La Quinta
MHR/OS
64'
55
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
City of La Quinta
Festival District
54'
50
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
City of La Quinta
LDR
54'
50
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
City of La Quinta
LDR
54'
50
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
City of La Quinta
LDR/OS
54'
50
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
City of La Quinta
LDR/OS
54'
50
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
City of La Quinta
LDR/GC
51'
45
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
City of Indio
LDR
64'
50
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
City of Indio
LDR
64'
50
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
City of La Quinta
LDR
54'
50
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
City of La Quinta
LDR
54'
50
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
City of La Quinta
LDR/GC
54'
50
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
City of La Quinta
LDR/GC
54'
50
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/GC
54'
50
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/GC
54'
50
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
City of Indio
LDR
64'
50
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
City of La Quinta
GC/OS
54'
50
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
54'
50
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/MHR/OS
54'
50
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/OS
54'
50
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/MHR
51'
45
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/MCF
51'
45
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
Riverside County
LDR
59'
50
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
Riverside County
LDR
59'
50
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
City of La Quinta
LDR
40'
40
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
City of La Quinta
LDR/MHR/OS
51'
45
29
Avenue 60
e/o Monroe St.
Riverside County
LDR/MHR
64'
50
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-28 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-11 Average Daily Traffic Volumes
ID
Roadway
Segment
Average Daily Traffic (1,000's)t
Existing 2019
EA
EAC 2021
EAC 2023
EAC 2026
EACSE 2026
General Plan
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue
22.8
23.3
28.2
28.7
32.0
32.1
33.8
33.9
36.5
37.0
36.5
37.0
51.5
52.0
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
16.2
16.9
19.4
20.1
22.9
23.0
24.0
24.1
25.8
26.5
25.8
26.5
34.3
35.0
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
12.7
13.6
16.3
17.2
18.4
18.6
19.8
20.0
21.7
22.5
21.7
22.6
32.2
33.0
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
5.9
6.4
9.0
9.5
8.2
8.3
9.1
9.2
10.8
11.3
10.8
11.3
22.5
23.0
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
6.9
7.7
11.3
12.1
9.4
9.5
10.9
11.0
13.3
14.0
13.3
14.0
32.3
33.0
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
4.5
5.8
7.5
8.8
7.5
7.8
8.6
8.9
10.4
11.7
10.4
11.8
23.7
25.0
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
9.4
11.9
15.2
17.7
13.8
14.4
15.3
16.0
18.2
20.7
18.2
21.0
42.5
45.0
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
6.7
9.7
10.7
13.7
11.3
12.1
12.3
13.3
14.3
17.4
14.3
18.0
31.0
34.0
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
2.8
3.9
5.1
6.2
4.7
5.0
5.4
5.8
6.6
7.6
6.6
7.9
19.0
20.0
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
9.6
10.1
10.2
10.7
12.8
12.9
13.2
13.3
13.8
14.3
13.8
14.3
15.1
15.6
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
7.5
8.2
9.7
10.4
10.7
10.8
11.7
11.8
13.1
13.8
13.1
13.8
19.3
20.0
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
5.1
5.9
8.9
9.7
8.5
8.6
10.3
10.4
12.9
13.6
12.9
13.6
31.3
32.0
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
3.9
4.6
7.6
8.3
6.8
6.9
9.2
9.3
12.6
13.3
12.6
13.3
34.3
35.0
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
3.4
4.4
6.1
7.1
6.7
6.9
9.0
9.3
12.0
13.1
12.0
13.2
24.9
26.0
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
2.7
2.9
5.2
5.4
6.4
6.4
9.2
9.2
12.6
12.8
12.6
12.9
26.8
27.0
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
12.9
13.4
13.0
13.5
16.7
16.8
16.8
16.9
17.0
17.5
17.0
17.5
17.2
17.7
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
11.2
11.4
14.6
14.8
14.6
14.6
15.7
15.7
17.4
17.6
17.4
17.7
27.8
28.0
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
9.3
9.5
11.9
12.1
11.1
11.1
11.9
11.9
13.3
13.5
13.3
13.6
20.8
21.0
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
7.9
8.3
11.2
11.6
11.5
11.6
12.6
12.7
14.2
14.6
14.2
14.6
25.7
26.0
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
8.6
9.5
12.8
13.7
10.9
11.1
12.4
12.6
14.7
15.5
14.7
15.6
30.2
31.0
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
5.3
5.6
7.7
8.0
6.5
6.6
7.7
7.8
9.3
9.7
9.3
9.7
17.7
18.0
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
2.0
2.3
4.0
4.3
2.9
3.0
3.5
3.6
4.4
4.8
4.4
4.8
16.7
17.0
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
1.6
2.2
2.8
3.4
4.8
5.1
5.0
5.5
5.7
6.2
5.7
6.7
11.9
12.5
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
2.3
4.1
3.8
5.6
4.8
5.3
5.2
5.8
5.9
7.8
5.9
8.2
12.2
14.0
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
1.8
2.7
3.8
4.7
2.7
2.9
3.6
3.8
4.9
5.7
4.9
5.8
18.2
19.0
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-29
June 2021
4.11 NOISE
ID
Roadway
Segment
Average Daily Traffic (1,000's)1
Existing 2019
EA
EAC 2021
EAC 2023
EAC 2026
EACSE 2026
General Plan
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
1.4
2.0
2.6
3.2
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
3.3
3.9
3.3
4.0
9.4
10.0
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
0.1
1.3
0.6
1.8
0.7
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.1
2.3
1.1
2.3
20.8
22.0
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
3.2
4.5
6.0
7.3
4.7
5.1
5.4
5.9
6.9
8.2
6.9
8.5
22.7
24.0
29
Avenue 60
e/o Monroe St.
1.2
1.9
2.5
3.2
4.4
4.6
4.8
5.1
5.7
6.4
5.7
6.6
14.3
15.0
1 Source: Coral Mountain Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
"EA" = Existing plus Ambient Growth; "EAC" = EA plus Cumulative; "EACSE"= EAC Special Event
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-30 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-12 Time of Day Vehicle Splits
Vehicle Type
Time of Day Splits'
Total of Time of
Day Splits
Daytime
Evening
Nighttime
Autos
77.50%
12.90%
9.60%
100.00%
Medium Trucks
84.80%
4.90%
10.30%
100.00%
Heavy Trucks
86.50%
2.70%
10.80%
100.00%
1 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 4.11-13 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%
1 Source: Typical Southern California vehicle mix and the County of Riverside Office of Industrial Hygiene.
On -Site
The onsite roadway parameters, including the ADT volumes used for the Noise Study is presented in
the Table 4.11-14, 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 City
of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element and project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis. For the
purposes of the calculations in the Noise Study, soft site conditions were used to analyze the on-site
traffic noise impacts for the project study area.
Table 4.11-14 On -Site Roadway Parameters
Roadway
Lanes
Classification 1
Average Daily
Traffic Volume'
Speed
Limit
(mph�Z
Site
Conditions
Avenue 58
4
Secondary Arterial
12,500
45
Soft
Madison Street
4
Secondary Arterial
20,000
45
Soft
Avenue 60
2
Collector
22,000
40
Soft
1 Source: The Wave at Coral Mountain Traffic Impact Analysis General Plan Buildout (2040)
2 Posted speed limit.
Noise Memo
In addition to the project -specific Noise Study, Urban Crossroads, Inc., prepared a Noise
Memorandum ("Noise Memo") for the proposed project. The purpose of the Noise Memo is to
address questions that were raised during the project Notice of Preparation (NOP) scoping meeting,
administered by the City of La Quinta on March 30, 2021. The Noise Memo supplements the Noise
Study, and is included as Appendix K.1 and is discussed in detail below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-31 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Project Design Features
Six -Foot Perimeter Wall to Reduce Arterial Roadway Noise
A six-foot perimeter wall will be developed along the northern and eastern property boundaries,
adjacent to the proposed Low Density Residential Planning Area (PA II). The six-foot perimeter walls
will be located adjacent to PA II in order to protect the proposed onsite residential uses from off-site
traffic noise by implementing improvements that diminish noise levels. Perimeter walls will be
developed along the southern and western property boundaries as a design requirement of the City.
The Noise Study determined that the barriers shall provide a weight of at least four pounds per square
foot of face area with no decorative cutouts or line -of -sight openings between shielded areas and the
roadways. The barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Unnecessary openings or
decorative cutouts shall not be made. All gaps (except for weep holes) should be filled with grout or
caulking. Because this requirement was assumed in the Noise Study analysis, and to assure effective
mitigation of noise from the project, Mitigation Measure NOI-5 is provided below to assure the
proper construction of perimeter walls. The project Development Agreement will ensure that the
project design features and mitigation will be enforceable by the City.
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
The project proposes the development of a mixed-use community consisting of 496 single family
residential dwellings, a 150 -room resort, a recreational Wave basin feature, 104 resort residential
dwellings, 57,000 square feet of tourist commercial uses, open space recreational uses, and 60,000
square feet of general commercial uses. Project -generated noise during short-term construction
activities, and long-term operational activities were evaluated in the project -specific Noise Study and
Noise Memorandum, both provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix K.1 and Appendix K.2). The
analysis of their findings is discussed 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 trucks, 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, (2) grading
and horizontal development, (3) building construction, (4) paving, and (5) architectural coating.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-32 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 68 dBA to in
excess of 80 dBA when measured at 50 feet. Hard site conditions are used in the construction noise
analysis which result in 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). As described above, if project -related
construction activities create noise levels which exceed the 85 dBA Leq at the nearby sensitive
receiver locations, the project will have significant construction noise impacts. Receiver locations are
indicated in Exhibit 4.11-2, Noise Source and 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. The construction
noise levels by phase and stage at the nearby noise -sensitive receiver locations are shown in Table
4.11-15 and Table 4.11-16. As shown in these tables, onsite construction noise will not exceed the 85
dBA threshold established by NIOSH. The highest onsite noise level during construction of Phases 2
and 3 is 83.2 dBA at receiver location P7. Therefore, impacts associated with construction noise will
be less than significant.
Table 4.11-15
Phase 1 Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary
Receiver
Location'
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Site
Preparation
Grading
Building
Construction
Paving
Architectural
Coating
Highest
Levels2
R1
65.6
63.8
61.9
61.5
55.5
65.6
R2
65.8
64.0
62.1
61.7
55.7
65.8
R3
63.0
61.2
59.3
58.9
52.9
63.0
R4
62.3
60.5
58.6
58.2
52.2
62.3
R5
61.6
59.8
57.9
57.5
51.5
61.6
R6
71.3
69.5
67.6
67.2
61.2
71.3
R7
72.5
70.7
68.8
68.4
62.4
72.5
R8
76.5
74.7
72.8
72.4
66.4
76.5
R9
58.7
56.9
55.0
54.6
48.6
58.7
R10
58.0
56.2
54.3
53.9
47.9
58.0
1 Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A in the noise study.
'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 11.1 in the noise study.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-33 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-16
Phase 2 & 3 Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary
Receiver
Locations
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Site
Preparation
Grading
Building
Construction
Paving
Architectural
Coating
Highest
Levels2
R1
74.8
73.0
71.1
70.7
64.7
74.8
R2
69.9
68.1
66.2
65.8
59.8
69.9
R3
67.9
66.1
64.2
63.8
57.8
67.9
R4
68.8
67.0
65.1
64.7
58.7
68.8
R5
70.6
68.8
66.9
66.5
60.5
70.6
R6
75.8
74.0
72.1
71.7
65.7
75.8
R7
68.6
66.8
64.9
64.5
58.5
68.6
R8
67.5
65.7
63.8
63.4
57.4
67.5
R9
63.7
61.9
60.0
59.6
53.6
63.7
R10
64.0
62.2
60.3
59.9
53.9
64.0
P1
82.8
81.0
79.1
78.7
72.7
82.8
P2
76.8
75.0
73.1
72.7
66.7
76.8
P3
82.3
80.5
78.6
78.2
72.2
82.3
P4
70.6
68.8
66.9
66.5
60.5
70.6
P5
82.5
80.7
78.8
78.4
72.4
82.5
P6
82.9
81.1
79.2
78.8
72.8
82.9
P7
83.2
81.4
79.5
79.1
73.1
83.2
P8
83.1
81.3
79.4
79.0
73.0
83.1
P9
75.3
73.5
71.6
71.2
65.2
75.3
P10
72.6
70.8
68.9
68.5
62.5
72.6
1 Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A in the noise study.
'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 11.1 in the noise study.
Future onsite residents affected by construction of Phases 2 and 3 are identified in Table 4.11-16 as
P1 through P10 (see locations on Exhibit 4.11-2). The onsite receiver locations will experience noise
during construction of the following phases, however, as stated in Table 4.11-16, the highest noise
level at receiver locations P1 through P10 is 83.2, at receiver location P7, which would occur during
site preparation of Phases 2 and 3. Therefore, onsite construction noise will not exceed the 85 dBA
threshold established by NIOSH, and impacts associated with construction noise will be less than
significant at the onsite receiver locations.
Additional project improvements include the installation of an off-site transformer bank at the
Imperial Irrigation District (IID) Avenue 58 Substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58. The off-site
improvements will extend a distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed
along Avenue 58 as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction for the conduits and line extension
would occur in the existing right of way and within the existing IID yard. Construction of the off-site
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-34 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
improvements will comply with City construction hours provided in Municipal Code Section 6.08. In
addition, construction activities associated with the line extensions in the right of way will be limited
to trenching, the laying of conduit, covering and repaving. These activities are typical of public works
in the right of way, and will be short term and separated from existing development by distance,
walls, and/or fences. The closest residential structure to the Avenue 58 right-of-way, where
excavation would occur, is located approximately 50 feet north of Avenue 58, within the Lion's Gate
residential community. The residential properties adjacent to Avenue 58, including the residential
home 50 feet north of the right-of-way, are separated by a minimum of 30 feet of existing landscaping
and a perimeter block wall. The closest residential structure to the Madison Street right-of-way,
where exaction may occur, is located approximately 150 feet east of Madison Street, within Andalusia
Country Club. The residential structure in Andalusia is separated from Madison Street by perimeter
landscaping, block walls, an interior path, and an interior road. According to the Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, at 50 feet dBA, an excavator can reach maximum
noise levels of 81 dBA, which does not exceed the 85 dBA threshold established by NIOSH.
Additionally, block walls and landscaping separate the residential communities from the right-of-way,
acting as sound attenuating barriers, which reduce noise levels experienced by the noise receivers.
The daytime work limitations and the physical separation between the IID improvements and existing
development will reduce potential construction noise to less than significant levels.
In order to lessen the impacts of construction noise, the City of La Quinta has established hours of
operation within Municipal Code, Section 6.08.050, as described in Table 4.11-2, Construction
Standards. The project will be required to comply to the construction hours allowed per the La Quinta
Municipal Code. Although the project will not result in significant construction noise impacts,
Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-4 are provided below to further reduce construction noise
to the maximum extent feasible. These mitigation measures include: construction contractors shall
equip all construction equipment (fixed or mobile) with properly operating and maintained mufflers,
consistent with industry standards. Equipment staging areas are required to be located 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. Finally, the contractor shall design
delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery
truck -related noise.
Off -Site Traffic Noise
Traffic generated by the operation of the proposed project will influence the traffic noise levels in
surrounding off-site areas. To quantify the traffic noise increases on the surrounding off-site areas,
Urban Crossroads calculated the changes in traffic noise levels on 28 roadway segments surrounding
the project site based on the change in the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes, which was provided
in the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix L.1), and determined whether the resulting noise levels were
consistent with Table 4.11-8.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-35 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
To assess the off-site transportation CNEL noise level impacts associated with the development of the
proposed project, noise contours were developed based on the project -specific Traffic Impact
Analysis. 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 also for special events and General Plan build out conditions.
Existing 2021 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions
EAC 2021 without project conditions CNEL noise levels are expected to range from 55.3 to 73.3 dBA
CNEL, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography.
The EAC with project conditions, which represent construction of Phase 1, will range from 56.4 to
73.3 dBA CNEL. Traffic generated by the project will generate a noise level increase of up to 1.1 dBA
CNEL on the study area roadway segments. Based on the significance criteria, the project -related
noise level increases are considered less than significant under EAC 2021 with project conditions at
the land uses adjacent to roadways conveying project traffic.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-36 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-17 EAC 2021 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts
ID
Road
Segment
Adjacent
Land Use'
CNEL at Adjacent
Land Use (dBA)Z
Off -Site
Traffic
Noise
Threshold3
Threshold
Exceeded?3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
GC/LDR
73.3
73.3
0.0
1.5
No
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
71.8
71.9
0.1
1.5
No
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
MHR/OS
70.9
70.9
0.0
1.5
No
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
Festival District
67.1
67.1
0.0
1.5
No
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
67.6
67.7
0.1
1.5
No
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
66.7
66.8
0.1
1.5
No
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR/OS
69.3
69.5
0.2
1.5
No
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/OS
68.4
68.7
0.3
1.5
No
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
63.7
64.0
0.3
3.0
No
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
LDR
67.5
67.5
0.0
1.5
No
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
66.7
66.7
0.0
1.5
No
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
67.2
67.3
0.1
1.5
No
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR
66.2
66.3
0.1
1.5
No
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/GC
66.2
66.3
0.1
1.5
No
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
66.0
66.0
0.0
1.5
No
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
LDR/GC
70.1
70.2
0.1
1.5
No
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
LDR/GC
69.6
69.6
0.0
1.5
No
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
LDR
66.8
66.8
0.0
1.5
No
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
GC/OS
68.5
68.6
0.1
1.5
No
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
68.3
68.4
0.1
1.5
No
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
66.0
66.1
0.1
1.5
No
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/OS
62.5
62.7
0.2
3.0
No
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR
63.8
64.1
0.3
3.0
No
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MCF
63.8
64.3
0.5
3.0
No
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
LDR
63.3
63.6
0.3
3.0
No
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
LDR
62.2
62.6
0.4
3.0
No
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
LDR
55.3
56.4
1.1
5.0
No
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
63.7
64.1
0.4
3.0
No
1 Source: City of La Quinta General Plan.
3The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest adjacent land use.
3 Significance Criteria (Section 4).
"LDR" = Low Density Residential; "MHR" = Medium/High Density Residential; "GC" = General Commercial;
"MCF" = Major Community Facility; "OS" = Open Space
EAC 2023 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-37 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
EAC 2023 without project conditions CNEL noise levels are expected to range from 55.9 to 73.5 dBA
CNEL, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography.
EAC 2023 with project conditions, which represent the completion of Phase 2, will range from 56.9 to
73.5 dBA CNEL. Traffic generated by the project will generate a noise level increase of up to 1.0 dBA
CNEL on the study area roadway segments. Based on the significance criteria, the project -related
noise level increases are considered less than significant under EAC 2023 with project conditions at
the land uses adjacent to roadways conveying project traffic.
Table 4.11-18 EAC 2023 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts
ID
Road
Segment
Adjacent
Land Use 1
CNEL at Adjacent
Land Use (dBA)2
Off -Site
Traffic
Noise
Threshold3
Threshold
Exceeded? 3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
GC/LDR
73.5
73.5
0.0
1.5
No
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
72.0
72.1
0.1
1.5
No
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
MHR/OS
71.2
71.2
0.0
1.5
No
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
Festival District
67.5
67.6
0.1
1.5
No
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
68.3
68.3
0.0
1.5
No
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
67.3
67.4
0.1
1.5
No
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR/OS
69.8
70.0
0.2
1.5
No
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/OS
68.8
69.2
0.4
1.5
No
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
64.3
64.6
0.3
3.0
No
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
LDR
67.6
67.6
0.0
1.5
No
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
67.1
67.1
0.0
1.5
No
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
68.0
68.1
0.1
1.5
No
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR
67.6
67.6
0.0
1.5
No
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/GC
67.5
67.6
0.1
1.5
No
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
67.6
67.6
0.0
1.5
No
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
LDR/GC
70.2
70.2
0.0
1.5
No
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
LDR/GC
69.9
69.9
0.0
1.5
No
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
LDR
67.1
67.1
0.0
1.5
No
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
GC/OS
68.9
69.0
0.1
1.5
No
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
68.8
68.9
0.1
1.5
No
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
66.8
66.8
0.0
1.5
No
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/OS
63.4
63.5
0.1
3.0
No
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR
64.0
64.4
0.4
3.0
No
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MCF
64.2
64.6
0.4
3.0
No
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
LDR
64.6
64.8
0.2
3.0
No
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
LDR
63.0
63.3
0.3
3.0
No
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
LDR
55.9
56.9
1.0
5.0
No
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
64.3
64.7
0.4
3.0
No
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-38
June 2021
4.11 NOISE
1 Source: City of La Quinta General Plan.
'The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest adjacent land use.
3 Significance Criteria (Section 4).
"LDR" = Low Density Residential; "MHR" = Medium/High Density Residential; "GC" = General Commercial;
"MCF" = Major Community Facility; "05" = Open Space
EAC 2026 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions
EAC 2026 without project conditions CNEL noise levels are expected to range from 57.3 to 73.9 dBA
CNEL, without accounting for any attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. EAC 2026
with project conditions, which represent completion of Phase 3 and build out of the project, will range
from 60.5 to 73.9 dBA CNEL. The project will generate a noise level increase of less than 3.0 dBA CNEL
in all study area roadway segments except segment 27, which will experience an increase of up to 3.2
dBA CNEL. Based on the significance criteria, the project -related noise level increases are considered
less than significant under EAC 2026 with project conditions at the land uses adjacent to roadways
conveying project traffic, because all but one segment experience increases of less than 3.0 dBA CNEL,
and because segment 27 does not currently experience 65 dBA noise levels, and project traffic will
not increase noise levels to 65 dBA, so the applicable threshold is 5.0 dBA CNEL, as described in Table
4.11-8.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-39 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-19 EAC 2026 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts
ID
Road
Segment
Adjacent
Land Use'
CNEL at Adjacent
Land Use (dBA)2
Off -Site
Traffic
Noise
Threshold3
Threshold
Exceeded?'
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
GC/LDR
73.9
73.9
0.0
1.5
No
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
72.4
72.5
0.1
1.5
No
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
MHR/OS
71.6
71.8
0.2
1.5
No
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
Festival District
68.2
68.4
0.2
1.5
No
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
69.2
69.4
0.2
1.5
No
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
68.1
68.6
0.5
1.5
No
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR/OS
70.5
71.1
0.6
1.5
No
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/OS
69.5
70.3
0.8
1.5
No
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
65.2
65.8
0.6
1.5
No
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
LDR
67.8
67.9
0.1
1.5
No
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
67.6
67.8
0.2
1.5
No
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
69.0
69.2
0.2
1.5
No
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR
68.9
69.2
0.3
1.5
No
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/GC
68.7
69.1
0.4
1.5
No
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
68.9
69.0
0.1
1.5
No
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
LDR/GC
70.2
70.3
0.1
1.5
No
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
LDR/GC
70.3
70.4
0.1
1.5
No
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
LDR
67.6
67.7
0.1
1.5
No
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
GC/OS
69.4
69.6
0.2
1.5
No
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
69.6
69.8
0.2
1.5
No
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
67.6
67.8
0.2
1.5
No
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/OS
64.3
64.7
0.4
3.0
No
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR
64.6
64.9
0.3
3.0
No
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MCF
64.7
65.9
1.2
3.0
No
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
LDR
65.9
66.6
0.7
1.5
No
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
LDR
64.2
64.9
0.7
3.0
No
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
LDR
57.3
60.5
3.2
5.0
No
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
65.4
66.2
0.8
1.5
No
1 Source: City of La Quinta General Plan.
2The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest adjacent land use.
3 Significance Criteria (Section 4).
"LDR" = Low Density Residential; "MHR" = Medium/High Density Residential; "GC" = General Commercial;
"MCF" = Major Community Facility; "O5" = Open Space
Special Events
The applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at the project site. The noise
study anticipates that the special event conditions will range from 60.5 to 73.9 dBA CNEL and will
generate a noise level increase of up to 3.2 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments (excluding
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-40 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
segment 27 discussed below). Based on the significance criteria (outlined in Table 4.11-8), the project -
related noise level increases are considered to be less than significant under the project with special
events condition at the land uses adjacent to roadways conveying project traffic. Although the project
will cause an increase in noise levels of up to 3.2 dBA CNEL at segment 27, segment 27 does not
currently experience 65 dBA noise levels, and project traffic will not increase noise levels to 65 dBA,
so the applicable threshold is 5.0 dBA CNEL, as set forth in Table 4.11-8.
Table 4.11-20 EAC 2026 Special Events Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts
ID
Road
Segment
Adjacent
Land Use'
CNEL at Adjacent
Land Use (dBA)'
Off -Site
Traffic
Noise
Threshold'
Threshold
Exceeded?'
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
GC/LDR
73.9
73.9
0.0
1.5
No
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
72.4
72.5
0.1
1.5
No
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
MHR/OS
71.6
71.8
0.2
1.5
No
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
Festival District
68.2
68.4
0.2
1.5
No
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
69.2
69.4
0.2
1.5
No
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
68.1
68.6
0.5
1.5
No
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR/OS
70.5
71.1
0.6
1.5
No
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/OS
69.5
70.5
1.0
1.5
No
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
65.2
66.0
0.8
1.5
No
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
LDR
67.8
67.9
0.1
1.5
No
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
67.6
67.8
0.2
1.5
No
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
69.0
69.2
0.2
1.5
No
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR
68.9
69.2
0.3
1.5
No
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/GC
68.7
69.1
0.4
1.5
No
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
68.9
69.0
0.1
1.5
No
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
LDR/GC
70.2
70.3
0.1
1.5
No
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
LDR/GC
70.3
70.4
0.1
1.5
No
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
LDR
67.6
67.7
0.1
1.5
No
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
GC/OS
69.4
69.6
0.2
1.5
No
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
69.6
69.8
0.2
1.5
No
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
67.6
67.8
0.2
1.5
No
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/OS
64.3
64.7
0.4
3.0
No
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR
64.6
65.3
0.7
3.0
No
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MCF
64.7
66.2
1.5
3.0
No
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
LDR
63.7
64.5
0.8
3.0
No
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
LDR
62.0
62.9
0.9
3.0
No
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
LDR
57.3
60.5
3.2
5.0
No
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
65.4
66.3
0.9
1.5
No
29
Avenue 60
e/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR
64.0
64.7
0.7
3.0
No
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-41
June 2021
4.11 NOISE
1 Sources: City of La Quinta, City of Indio and County of Riverside General Plan Land Use Map.
2The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest adjacent land use.
3 Significance Criteria (Section 4).
"LDR" = Low Density Residential; "MHR" = Medium/High Density Residential; "GC" = General Commercial;
"MCF" = Major Community Facility; "O5" = Open Space
Onsite residential uses will be protected from off-site traffic noise by implementing improvements
that diminish noise levels. Such improvements include constructing noise barriers (i.e., masonry
block, 'A -inch -thick glass, etc.), as well as implementing construction materials that diminish noise
(i.e., sound transmission class rated windows and doors), discussed further in this noise section.
On -Site Traffic Noise
Urban Crossroads completed an onsite exterior noise analysis to determine the traffic noise exposure
and to identify potential necessary noise abatement measures for the project. Exterior noise levels
are generally limited to outdoor living areas of frequent human use (e.g., backyards of single-family
homes). Interior noise levels are evaluated at the first and second floor building facade. Project -
related noise levels are considered significant if the on-site exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL
at the outdoor living areas of residential homes, or 70 dBA CNEL at hotel uses. Interior noise levels
cannot exceed 45 dBA CNEL for residential homes and the hotel building. It is expected that the
primary source of noise at the project site will be traffic from Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The
project will also experience some background traffic noise impacts from its internal streets and
parking lots. As described below, traffic noise will not make a significant contribution to the noise
environment beyond of the right-of-way of each road.
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 4.11-21 presents a summary of future exterior noise levels for
the future low-density residential developments within Planning Area II. The on-site exterior traffic
noise levels indicate that the single family residential development adjacent to Avenue 58 and
Madison Street will experience exterior noise levels ranging from 66.7 to 68.8 dBA CNEL, without
construction of the required perimeter wall.
Table 4.11-21 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels
Receiver
Location
Roadway
Exterior
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)1
Exterior Noise
Level Threshold
(dBA CNEL)2
Threshold
Exceeded?
Planning Area II-LDR
Avenue 58
66.7
65
Yes
Madison Street
68.8
65
Yes
1 On-site traffic noise calculations included in Appendix 8.1 in Noise Study.
2 City of La Quinta exterior noise criteria (See Section 4 of Noise Study).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-42
June 2021
4.11 NOISE
However, with construction of the required perimeter walls along Madison Street and Avenue 58, the
City of La Quinta's 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standards will be satisfied at all outdoor living
areas (backyards) of single-family residential uses in the Project, as shown in Table 4.11-22 (exterior
noise levels ranging from 57.4 to 59.4 dBA CNEL).
Table 4.11-22 Exterior Traffic Noise Levels with Required Perimeter Wall
Receiver
Location
Roadway
Exterior
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)1
Exterior Noise
Level Threshold
(dBA CNEL)2
Threshold
Exceeded?
Barrier
Height
(Feet)
Planning Area II-
LDR
Avenue 58
57.4
65
No
6.0
Madison Street
59.4
65
No
6.0
1 On-site traffic noise calculations included in Appendix 8.1 of the noise study.
2 City of La Quinta exterior noise criteria (See Section 4 in the noise study).
Per the Noise Study, a minimum block wall of 6 feet in height is required to provide an effective noise
barrier to satisfy the City of La Quinta 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standards at the outdoor living
areas of single family homes. This is indicated as Mitigation Measure NOI-5. With this required
perimeter wall City of La Quinta exterior noise level standards will be satisfied, and the future project
residents will not be exposed to significant exterior noise levels.
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," requiring a windows -closed condition and 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
ratings of 25. Well -sealed perimeter gaps around the doors are essential to achieve the
optimal STC rating.
• Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between
the wall and pipes, ducts or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight
seal.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-43 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
• 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 4.11-23 displays the interior noise levels with these standard requirements. Accordingly,
interior noise levels within the project site will comply with the City of La Quinta's requirements and
result in less than significant impacts.
Table 4.11-23 Interior Noise Levels (CNEL)
Building
(Fa4ade)
Floor
Noise
Level
at Facade'
Required
Interior
NR2
Minimum
Estimated
Interior N113
Upgraded
Interior
Noise
Levels
Levels
Threshold
Threshold
Exceeded?
Avenue 58
1
56.3
11.3
25
No
31.3
45
No
2
65.5
20.5
25
No
40.5
45
No
Madison St.
1
58.3
13.3
25
No
33.3
45
No
2
67.5
22.5
25
No
42.5
45
No
Exterior noise level at the facade with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air condition ng).
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
Operational Noise Impacts
The La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC), Ordinance 550, Sections 9.100.210 (B) and (C) establishes the
noise level standards for stationary noise sources. The standards are described in Table 4.11.5.
Reference noise level measurements were collected from similar types of activities to represent the
noise levels expected with the development of the proposed project. The receiver locations and noise
source locations used to assess the project -related operational noise levels are displayed in Exhibit
4.11-2. Worst-case noise environments were assumed with the Wave Basin/Wave machine activity,
outdoor pool/spa activity, outdoor activity, and neighborhood commercial land use activity all
operating simultaneously. However, these 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. The operation of the Wave
Basin will conclude at 10:00 p.m., compliant with the recreational operational hours allowed by the
City of La Quinta. This is indicated as Mitigation Measure NOI-6. Table 4.11-24 displays the reference
noise level measurements used for this analysis.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-44 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-24 Reference Noise Level Measurements
Noise Source
Duration
(hh:mm:ss)
Ref.
Distance
(Feet)
Noise
Source
Height
(Feet)
Min./Hours
Reference Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
Sound
Power
Level
(dBA) 6
Day
Night
@ Ref.
Dist.
@ 50
Feet
Wave Basin/Wave
Machine'
00:10:00
12'
5'
60
0
75.7
63.3
112.0
Outdoor Pool/Spa
Activity'
00:10:00
5'
5'
60
0
77.8
57.8
103.3
Outdoor Activity3
00:15:00
5'
5'
60
0
63.4
43.4
84.3
Neighborhood
Commercial4
00:01:00
20'
5'
60
0
62.8
54.8
99.6
1 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 4/13/2020 at the Kelly Slater Surf Ranch in the City of Lemoore, CA.
As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 3/16/2005 at the Westin Hotel in the City of Rancho Mirage.
3 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 10/8/2014 by Urban Crossroads, Inc. at the Founder's Park in the County of Orange.
As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 4/18/2018 by Urban Crossroads, Inc. at Destination Ramon Commercial Center
'Anticipated duration (minutes within the hour) of noise activity during typical hourly conditions expected at the Project site.
"Day" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Night" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
6 Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound source independent of
distance or surroundings. Sound power levels calculated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference distance to the noise
source. Numbers may vary due to size differences between point and area noise sources.
The reference noise levels are described further below.
Wave Basin/Wave Machine Activity
To measure the noise levels associated with the wave machine, Urban Crossroads, Inc. collected
reference noise level measurements at eight different locations around the Kelly Slater Surf Ranch in
the City of Lemoore, CA. The Surf Ranch in Lemoore is a private facility with a proprietary wave
machine technology capable of generating waves every 3 to 4 minutes. The same technology is
proposed for the project site. The noise level measurement locations were selected to identify the
unique noise characteristics associated with different stages of each wave. Prior to each wave, the
control tower announces the event over the public address system. This is followed by the noise
generated from the movement of the sled and an increase in noise levels from the mechanical
equipment buildings. As the sled moves through the lagoon, noise from the cable and metal rollers is
clearly audible. However, throughout each wave event, the primary noise source is simply the
movement of water from each wave in the lagoon. Over a period of 53 minutes, ten wave events
were measured at eight different locations on April 13, 2020. The reference noise levels suggest that
during peak wave events, the Wave Basin generates noise levels ranging from 62.6 dBA Leq at the
end of the lagoon, 73.8 dBA Leq in the lifeguard tower and 75.7 dBA Leq near the cable roller system.
To describe the worst-case reference noise level conditions, the highest reference noise level
describing each peak wave noise event of 75.7 dBA Leq at a distance of 12 feet is used. The reference
noise level measurements include loudspeaker announcements, as well as the noise generated from
the waves and associated machinery. This reference noise level likely overstates the expected noise
levels from the Wave Basin/wave machine activity at the project since it only describes the actual
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-45 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
wave event. In addition, improved design plans for the project may place the cable roller system
under the water surface. Based on statements made by the applicant to the noise engineer, the
placement of the cable roller system underground may eliminate this noise source. However, to
ensure an analysis of the "worst-case" scenario, the noise study assumed the maximum level of noise
measured at the existing facility (75.7 dBA). As previously stated, the project's Wave Basin/wave
machine activities will be limited to daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. with no planned
nighttime activities. This is required under Mitigation Measure NOI-6 below.
Concerns regarding the accuracy of comparing noise measurements of the Kelly Slater Surf Ranch in
Lemoore to the proposed project were introduced by the public during the project's scoping meeting
on March 30, 2021. For context, the area surrounding the Kelly Slater Surf Ranch in Lemoore is
characterized by agricultural fields, whereas the proposed project is located on the desert floor and
adjacent to Coral Mountain. The public expressed concerns that sound propagation and attenuation
would vary between the different land types. Urban Crossroads provided a Noise Memo, dated April
20, 2020, to address this concern. The Noise Memo states that agricultural fields and desert floors
are considered soft surfaces for the purposes of sound propagation. Additionally, the noise expert
stated that Coral Mountain is likely to absorb, rather than reflect noise back towards sensitive
receiver locations. Only hard surfaces, such as pavement, would change the sound attenuation
characteristics of the project. In addition, the worst-case reference noise level conditions were taken
during peak wave noise events at 12 feet, as stated above, whereas Coral Mountain is located
approximately 650 feet from the Wave Basin. The reference noise level measurements themselves
do not include any sound attenuation for the agricultural fields. Therefore, although the proposed
project is located on the desert floor and adjacent to Coral Mountain, the noise measurements from
the Lemoore site provide an accurate comparison of noise levels to occur at the project site.
Outdoor Pool/Spa Activity
To determine the noise levels associated with outdoor hotel pool and spa activity, Urban Crossroads
collected a reference noise level measurement on March 16, 2005 at the Westin Hotel in the City of
Rancho Mirage. The measured reference noise level at 50 feet is 57.8 dBA Leq. The outdoor pool/spa
activity noise levels included a waterfall, people talking, and children and adults swimming and
playing in a commercial hotel pool.
Outdoor Activities
To represent the potential noise level impacts associated with the Project's outdoor or beach club
activities, a reference noise level measurement was collected on Wednesday, October 8, 2014 at the
Founders Park in the unincorporated community of Ladera Ranch in the County of Orange. The
reference noise levels collected at Founders Park are expected to overestimate the noise level
activities within the outdoor recreation areas at the Project site, since the reference noise level
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-46 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
measurement includes parents speaking on cell phones, kids playing, and background youth soccer
games, with coaches shouting instructions and people cheering and clapping. Using the uniform
reference distance of 50 feet, the reference playground activity noise level was 43.4 dBA Leq.
Neighborhood Commercial
To describe the potential noise level impacts associated with the proposed neighborhood commercial
center, a reference noise level measurement was collected at the Destination Ramon Commercial
Center in Cathedral City on April 18, 2018. The noise level measurements collected show a peak
hourly noise level of 54.8 dBA Leq when measured at 50 feet.
As stated previously, operational noise impacts are considered significant if project -related
operational (stationary -source) noise levels exceed the exterior 65 dBA L50 noise level standards for
residential land uses.
Operational noise impacts are also considered significant if the existing ambient noise levels at the
nearby noise sensitive receivers near the project site are less than 60 dBA L50 and the project creates
a readily perceptible 5 dBA L50 or greater project -related noise level increase; or already exceed 65
dBA L50, and the project creates a community noise level increase of greater than 1.5 dBA L50.
Project Operational Noise Levels
Using the reference noise levels to represent the proposed project operations that include Wave
Basin/wave machine activity, outdoor pool/spa activity, outdoor activity, and neighborhood
commercial land use activity, Urban Crossroads, Inc. calculated the operational source noise level
increases that would be experienced at each of the receiver locations. The daytime hourly noise levels
at the off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 39.8 to 53.3 dBA Leq. The on-site project
receiver locations are expected to range from 51.8 to 64.5 dBA Leq. In addition, the unmitigated
exterior noise levels at the nearest property line, located approximately 200 feet east of the Wave
Basin and designated for residential development, are estimated at 59.3 dBA Leq., which is below the
City's significance threshold of 65 dBA. According to the Noise Memo provided by Urban Crossroads,
the project's location adjacent to Coral Mountain would not result in increased or amplified noise
levels. According to the noise expert, Coral Mountain is likely absorb noise, rather than reflect the
noise back towards sensitive receiver locations, and based its distance from the Wave Basin, Coral
Mountain does not have the potential to increase the operational noise levels. Field studies
conducted by the FHWA have shown that the reflection from barriers and buildings does not
substantially increase noise levels. If all of the noise striking a structure was reflected back to a given
receiving point, the increase would be theoretically limited to 3 dBA. However, FHWA measures made
to quantify reflective increases in traffic noise have not shown an increase of greater than 1-2 dBA;
an increase that is not perceptible to the average human ear. See the following discussion for noise
level increase analysis.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-47 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
The operational noise levels associated with the project will satisfy the City of La Quinta daytime
exterior noise level standards with no planned nighttime operational noise source activity. Therefore,
the operational noise impacts to on-site and off-site receptors are considered less than significant at
all receiver locations. This is depicted in the table below.
Table 4.11-25 Daytime Project Operational Noise Levels
Receiver
Location'
Project Operational Noise Levels (dBA Leq)2
Surf
Lagoon/
Wave
Machine
Outdoor
Pool/
Spa Activity
Outdoor
Activity
Neighborhood
Commercial
Total
Noise Level
Standards
3
(dBA Leq)
Noise Level
Standards
Exceeded?
R1
44.2
36.0
19.0
41.8
46.6
65
No
R2
38.0
30.3
11.8
45.7
46.5
65
No
R3
37.4
29.7
10.9
42.5
43.8
65
No
R4
38.2
30.9
11.4
40.9
43.0
65
No
R5
39.3
32.3
12.1
37.7
42.1
65
No
R6
51.4
44.0
19.5
31.5
52.2
65
No
R7
45.0
38.9
11.5
28.9
46.0
65
No
R8
46.6
36.5
13.5
23.2
47.0
65
No
R9
41.1
30.3
15.3
23.5
41.5
65
No
R10
38.6
29.0
13.5
31.4
39.8
65
No
P1
58.3
43.8
37.2
32.4
58.5
65
No
P2
53.1
51.4
23.8
34.5
55.4
65
No
P3
61.1
46.7
29.2
30.5
61.3
65
No
P4
53.7
40.8
15.8
23.3
53.9
65
No
P5
53.9
48.6
22.0
32.8
55.1
65
No
P6
53.2
46.4
29.5
36.0
54.1
65
No
P7
50.4
45.6
23.5
37.6
51.8
65
No
P8
44.7
37.3
18.7
53.0
53.7
65
No
P9
62.2
47.9
38.6
32.5
62.4
65
No
P10
64.0
55.1
24.7
31.4
64.5
65
No
'See Exhibit 10-A in the Noise Study for the off-site (R eceiver and on-site (P)roject locations
2 Unmitigated CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix 10.1 of the Noise Study.
3 Exterior noise level standards for residential land use, as shown on Table 4-2 in the Noise Study.
° Do the estimated Project operational noise source activities exceed the noise level standards?
Project Operational Noise Level Increase
To describe the project operational noise level increase, the project operational noise levels are
combined with the existing ambient noise level measurements for the nearby receiver locations
potentially impacted by project operational noise sources. The difference between the combined
project and ambient noise levels describes the project noise level increase to the existing ambient
noise environment. As indicated in Table 4.11-26, the project will generate unmitigated daytime
operational noise level increase ranging from 0.0 to 4.9 dBA Leq at nearby off-site receiver locations.
This increase satisfies the incremental operational noise level criteria presented above, in Table 4.11 -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-48 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
8. Therefore, the incremental project operational noise level increase is considered less than
significant at all receiver locations.
Table 4.11-26 Daytime Project Operational Noise Level Increases
Receiver Location
Location
Total Project
Operational
Noise Level'
Meas. s
Reference
Ambient
Noise Levels4
Combined
Project and
Ambients
Projectb
Increase
Threshold'
Threshold
Exceeded?'
R1
46.6
L1
54.2
54.9
0.7
5.0
No
R2
46.5
L2
62.5
62.6
0.1
3.0
No
R3
43.8
L3
61.2
61.3
0.1
3.0
No
R4
43.0
L4
54.5
54.8
0.3
5.0
No
R5
42.1
L5
59.7
59.8
0.1
5.0
No
R6
52.2
L6
58.7
59.6
0.9
5.0
No
R7
46.0
L7
57.9
58.2
0.3
5.0
No
R8
47.0
L8
43.8
48.7
4.9
5.0
No
R9
41.5
L9
51.7
52.1
0.4
5.0
No
R10
39.8
L10
61.9
61.9
0.0
3.0
No
'See Exhibit 9-A in the noise study for the off-site sensitive receiver locations.
2 Total Project operational noise levels as shown on Table 10-3 in the noise study.
3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A in the noise study.
° Observed daytime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1 in the noise study.
5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the Project activities.
e The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed Project activities.
Significance Criteria as defined in Section 4 of the noise study.
Conclusion
As described throughout this discussion, construction of the proposed project would not result in
significant impacts. However, to minimize construction noise to the maximum extent feasible,
Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-4 are identified below. The project will not generate
operational noise levels that have any significant impact on any sensitive receptors, including
residents in the surrounding communities. 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 4.11-2, Construction Standards. Off-site traffic generates traffic noise
on the project site; therefore, six-foot perimeter walls will be developed along the existing rights-of-
way and adjacent to the proposed Low Density Residential Planning Area (PA II). This is indicated as
Mitigation Measure NOI-5 below. With the required perimeter walls and standard building
construction and windows, future project residents will not be exposed to interior or exterior noise
levels that exceeds the City's established limits. Operational noise impacts include the operation of
the Wave Basin/wave machine activity, outdoor pool/spa activity, outdoor activity, and neighborhood
commercial land use activity. 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. and 10:00 p.m., established as Mitigation
Measure NOI-6, and compliant with the recreational operational hours established by the City of La
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-49 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Quinta. Impacts of project -related construction and operational noise will be less than significant with
the implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-6.
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels
The noise study analyzed the potential impacts of vibration created by the proposed project. Per the
noise study, potential ground -borne vibration is associated with vehicular traffic and construction
activities. Ground -borne vibration levels from automobile 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 of the associated events,
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 buildings in the vicinity.
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.
Ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized on
Table 4.11-7. 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 90 to 1,451 feet from project
construction activities, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.000 to
0.009 in/sec RMS and will remain below the threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS at all receiver locations.
This is displayed in Table 4.11-27. Therefore, the vibration impacts to human beings are considered
less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-50 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-27 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels
Receiver'Const.
Distance
to
Activity
(Feet)
Receiver Levels (in/sec) PPV2
RMS
Velocity
Levels
(in/sec) 3
Threshold
(in/sec)
RMS4
Threshold
Exceeded?5
Small
Bulldozer
Jack-
hammer
Loaded
Trucks
Large
Bulldozer
Peak
Vibration
R1
154'
0.000
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.004
0.01
No
R2
181'
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.003
0.01
No
R3
323'
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.01
No
R4
519'
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.01
No
R5
352'
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.01
No
R6
134'
0.000
0.003
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.005
0.01
No
R7
90'
0.000
0.005
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.009
0.01
No
R8
90'
0.000
0.005
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.009
0.01
No
R9
1,451'
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.01
No
R10
1,378'
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.01
No
Receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A in the Noise Study.
2 Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment included on Table 6-6 in the Noise Study.
3 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, September 2013.
'Source: County of Riverside General Plan Noise Element, Policy N 16.3.
'Does the vibration level exceed the maximum acceptable vibration threshold?
The impacts at the site are of the closest sensitive receivers are unlikely to be sustained during the
entire construction period but will occur only during the times that heavy construction equipment is
operating adjacent to the project site perimeter. Additionally, onsite construction is not anticipated
to significantly impact onsite residents and residential structures since building standards for seismic
activity in the area exceed impacts created by vibration of construction activity. Therefore, the
generation of groundborne vibration and groundborne noise by project construction activities are
anticipated to be less than significant.
4.11.5 Cumulative Impacts
Buildout of the City of La Quinta would result in an increase of traffic throughout the City as well as the
operation of future projects in areas that were previously vacant and undeveloped. The development
of vacant lots and the increase of traffic in La Quinta would result in increased noise levels throughout
the City and along local roadways. These potentially significant cumulative impacts were evaluated in
the City's General Plan EIR, and with the City standards and requirements adopted as mitigation
measures, cumulative noise impacts of buildout of the City's General Plan were determined to be less
than significant. See General Plan Draft EIR, at pp. III -161 through III -164. The analysis and conclusions
of the General Plan EIR are incorporated herein by this reference pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15130.
Construction
Buildout of La Quinta would result in construction -related noise, which would lead to an increase in
ambient noise. However, construction activities will not occur on undeveloped lands at once, but will
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-51 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
rather be distributed over years, are short-term and would not continue after construction is complete.
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 in order to lessen the impacts of
construction noise. Additional mitigation during construction activities include 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.
Off -Site Transportation Noise
General Plan 2040 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions
The General Plan 2040 without project conditions CNEL noise levels are expected to range from 67.8
to 75.4 dBA CNEL, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or
topography. The General Plan 2040 with project conditions will range from 68.0 to 75.4 dBA CNEL.
The project will generate a noise level increase of up to 0.6 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway
segments. Based on the significance criteria, the project -related noise level increases are considered
less than significant under General Plan 2040 with project conditions at the land uses adjacent to
roadways conveying project traffic. Therefore, the implementation of the General Plan Amendment
will have less than significant impacts on surrounding roadway segments.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-52 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
Table 4.11-28 General Plan 2040 Off -Site Project -Related Traffic Noise Impacts
ID
Road
Segment
Adjacent
Land Usel
CNEL at Adjacent
Land Use (dBA)2
Off -Site
Traffic
Noise
Threshold3
Threshold
Exceeded?3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
1
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 50
GC/LDR
75.4
75.4
0.0
1.5
No
2
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR/MHR/OS/GC
73.6
73.7
0.1
1.5
No
3
Jefferson St.
n/o Avenue 54
MHR/OS
73.3
73.4
0.1
1.5
No
4
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 50
Festival District
71.4
71.5
0.1
1.5
No
5
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
73.0
73.1
0.1
1.5
No
6
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
71.7
71.9
0.2
1.5
No
7
Madison St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR/OS
74.2
74.4
0.2
1.5
No
8
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/OS
72.8
73.2
0.4
1.5
No
9
Madison St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
69.8
70.0
0.2
1.5
No
10
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 50
LDR
68.2
68.3
0.1
1.5
No
11
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 52
LDR
69.2
69.4
0.2
1.5
No
12
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 54
LDR
72.9
73.0
0.1
1.5
No
13
Monroe St.
n/o Airport BI.
LDR
73.3
73.4
0.1
1.5
No
14
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 58
LDR/GC
71.9
72.1
0.2
1.5
No
15
Monroe St.
n/o Avenue 60
LDR/GC
72.2
72.2
0.0
1.5
No
16
Avenue 50
w/o Jefferson St.
LDR/GC
70.3
70.4
0.1
1.5
No
17
Avenue 50
w/o Madison St.
LDR/GC
72.4
72.4
0.0
1.5
No
18
Avenue 50
e/o Monroe St.
LDR
69.6
69.6
0.0
1.5
No
19
Avenue 52
w/o Monroe St.
GC/OS
72.0
72.1
0.1
1.5
No
20
Avenue 54
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR/GC/OS
72.7
72.8
0.1
1.5
No
21
Avenue 54
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
70.4
70.5
0.1
1.5
No
22
Airport BI.
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/OS
70.1
70.2
0.1
1.5
No
23
Avenue 58
w/o Madison St.
LDR/MHR
67.8
68.0
0.2
1.5
No
24
Avenue 58
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MCF
67.9
68.5
0.6
1.5
No
25
Avenue 58
w/o Jackson St.
LDR
71.6
71.8
0.2
1.5
No
26
Avenue 58
e/o Jackson St.
LDR
68.8
69.0
0.2
1.5
No
27
Avenue 60
w/o Madison St.
LDR
70.1
70.3
0.2
1.5
No
28
Avenue 60
w/o Monroe St.
LDR/MHR/OS
70.6
70.8
0.2
1.5
No
1 Source: City of La Quinta General Plan.
3The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest adjacent land use.
3 Significance Criteria (Section 4).
"LDR" = Low Density Residential; "MHR" = Medium/High Density Residential; "GC" = General Commercial;
"MCF" = Major Community Facility; "OS" = Open Space
The comparison concluded that off-site traffic noise would be less than significant, and no mitigation
is required under cumulative conditions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-53 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
On -Site Noise
The implementation of building standards, including the use of building materials and windows with a
standard sound transmission class (STC) rating of 27, 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:
• 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
ratings of 25. Well -sealed perimeter gaps around the doors are essential to achieve the
optimal STC rating.
• Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or 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.
Implementation of building standards will ensure that building windows, doors, roofs, walls, and
ventilation are utilized in future developments to reduce noise observed from inside residential
buildings. This, in addition to the development of noise attenuating 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.
Cumulative impacts are not anticipated to be significant.
4.11.6 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:
NOI-1 Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a
note indicating that project construction activities shall comply with the City of La Quinta
Municipal Code requirements.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-54 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
NOI-2 During all project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction
equipment, fixed or mobile, with property operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with
manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest
the project site.
NOI-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 (i.e., to the center).
NOI-4 The contractor shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or
residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise.
NOI-5 A six-foot perimeter wall will be developed along the northern and eastern property
boundaries, adjacent to the proposed Low Density Residential Planning Area (PA II), in order
to protect the proposed onsite residential uses from off-site traffic noise. The barriers shall
provide a weight of at least four pounds per square foot of face area with no decorative
cutouts or line -of -sight openings between shielded areas and the roadways. The barrier must
present a solid face from top to bottom. Unnecessary openings or decorative cutouts shall not
be made. All gaps (except for weep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking.
NOI-6 The operation of the Wave Basin and associated Wave machines shall be limited to the daytime
and evening hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., compliant with the recreational operational
hours allowed by the City of La Quinta.
4.11.7 Level of Impact Significance after Mitigation
The project will not have any significant noise impacts. In addition, the implementation of Mitigation
Measures NOI-1 through NOI-6 will ensure that project -related noise generated by construction and
operational activities are further reduced to the maximum extent feasible.
4.11.8 Resources
1. Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., March 17, 2021.
2. The Wave at Coral Mountain Noise Memorandum, Urban Crossroads, Inc., April 20, 2021.
3. 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 0.pdf accessed August 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-55 June 2021
4.11 NOISE
4. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of
Transportation, September 2013, available at
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34120/Caltrans-2013-construction-
vibration-PDF?bidld=, accessed August 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.11-56 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.12 Public Services
4.12 Public Services
4.12.1 Introduction
This section addresses the potential impacts to fire protection, emergency medical services, and police
protection that may result from construction or operation of the proposed project ("project"). The
following discussion addresses existing police and fire conditions of the project site and surroundings,
identifies and analyzes environmental impacts, and recommends measures to reduce or avoid adverse
impacts anticipated from project implementation, as applicable. This section is based on the information
contained in the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, the City of La Quinta's Website, and 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 terms, definitions, and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
4.12.2 Existing Conditions
The project property is currently vacant. No habitable structures occur on the site. Currently, the project
site, in its vacant state, has minimal and negligible impacts on fire or police service calls, City parks,
schools, or public facilities.
Fire Protection Services
The project is located within the City of La Quinta which is served by the Riverside County Fire
Department (RCFD). 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 from the project, 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 4.12-1
lists the three fire stations, their locations, and their distance from the project's proposed entrance on
Madison Street.
Table 4.12-1 La Quinta Fire Station Locations
Fire Station
Location
Distance from Avenue 58
Fire Station 32
78111 Avenue 52
4.0 miles northwest
Fire Station 70
54001 Madison Street
1.95 miles north
Fire Station 93
44555 Adams Street
7.0 miles northwest
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-1 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
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 entered into a cooperative agreement with the County of Riverside, through its Cooperative
Fire Programs Fire Protection Reimbursement Agreement. This agreement ensures the City is provided
with an array of services from fire protection to hazardous materials discharge and medical emergencies.
RCFD partners with 21 cities for contract services, which include most of the Coachella Valley. The Fire
Department 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 response times are between 5 and 7 minutes.
In order to continue to provide an acceptable level of service for the southeastern portion of the City in
the future, the City has preliminary plans for a future fire station to serve the southern portion of the
City, including the project site. Currently, there is an ongoing discussion with the Riverside County Fire
Department and the City, to locate and fund the new south La Quinta fire station. 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. (See pp. 8-1 through 8-8 of Development Impact Fee Study, dated September 23, 2019, and
attached as Exhibit A to City Council Resolution No. 2020-003, approved and adopted on February 4,
2020). The new fire station will improve response performance in the southeast portion of the City and
surrounding area, which are experiencing new development and increased service demand.
Police Protection
The City has contracted for police services from the Riverside County Sheriff's Department since its
incorporation in 1982. 24-hour police protection is offered to the City of La Quinta. The Sheriffs
Department 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 limit. This station is the Civic Center
Community Policing Office, located at 78495 Calle Tampico. In addition, the Thermal Sheriff's Station,
located in Thermal, is the Police Department's central facility for this portion of the Coachella Valley. The
Thermal Sheriff's Station includes a jail. The police stations, their locations, and distances from the
project property are displayed in Table 4.12-2, below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-2 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
Table 4.12-2 La Quinta Police Station Locations
Station
Location
Distance from Avenue 58
Civic Center Community
Policing Office
78495 Calle
Tampico, La Quinta
4.20 miles northwest
Thermal Sheriff's Station
(Riverside County Sheriff's
Department)
86625 Airport
Boulevard, Thermal
5.75 miles northeast
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 40,660 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.
They are trained by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and support the deputies of the La Quinta
Police Department.
The City contracts annually for police services. 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; a 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 police officers is one for every 1,000 residents.
Schools
The City is served by two public school districts which provide Kindergarten through Grade 12 education:
Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). Both
Districts are funded through a number of sources, including a portion of local property tax, bond issues,
Redevelopment Agency pass-through payments, 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 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.
Desert Sands Unified School District serves families located west of Jefferson Street and north of Avenue
48. Coachella Valley Unified School District serves families located east of Jefferson Street and south of
Avenue 48, including the project site. 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 1.50 miles northeast of the project, at 82225 Airport Boulevard, in
Thermal. Table 4.12-3 lists the four CVUSD schools that serve students in La Quinta, their locations and
distance from the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-3 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
Table 4.12-3 CVUSD Schools within La Quinta
School
Location
Distance from Project
Westside Elementary
82225 Airport Boulevard, Thermal
1.50 miles northeast
Cahuilla Desert Academy
82489 Avenue 52, Coachella
3.36 miles northeast
Mountain Vista Elementary
49750 Hjorth Street, Indio
4.0 miles north
Coachella Valley High School
83800 Airport Boulevard, Thermal
3.0 miles northeast
As of the 2019/2020 school year, CVUSD had 17,495 students enrolled. The District, in their 2020 CVUSD
Fee Justification Report, conducted a capacity analysis that determined the District's capacity and
enrollment to identify existing facilities that may be available to house future students. The analysis
determined the District has excess capacity at its elementary and high school levels to accommodate
students from new development. This is displayed in Table 4.12-4.
Table 4.12-4 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 the Coachella Valley Unified School District by the year 2040. Of these new dwelling units,
approximately 21.46 percent have mitigated the impact of their development through a mitigation
agreement.
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 4.12-5, Parks within the City of
La Quinta, lists the various parks within the City, their locations, acreages, and amenities.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-4 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
Table 4.12-5 Parks within the City of La Quinta
Facility
Location
Acres
Amenities
Lake Cahuilla
Regional Park
58075 Jefferson St., 0.90
miles west of the project
710
Camping, 135 -acre lake, fishing, hiking, and
horseback riding
Cove Oasis
Top of the Cove, 3.40 miles1
northwest of the project
Picnic tables and walking paths connected
to hiking trails
Velasco Park
Calle Temecula, 3.30 miles
northwest of project
0 23
Neighborhood park with playground, grass
area, benches
Event Park at
SilverRock
Southeast corner of Avenue
52 and SilverRock Way, 3.30
miles northwest of project
14.0
SilverRock Resort passive park venue to
include parking lot, walking paths, turf
areas, sloped event lawn, water features,
and recreation building
Eisenhower
Park
53400 Eisenhower Dr., 3.50
miles northwest of project
0.46
Neighborhood park with playground, grass
area, benches
Fritz Burns Park
78107 Avenue 52, 4.0 miles
northwest of the project
6.0
Playground, dog park, skate park, swimming
pool, tennis courts, water features, picnic
tables
La Quinta
Community
Park
77865 Avenida Montezuma,
4.40 miles northwest of the
project
4.71
Community fitness center, baseball field,
basketball court, playground, benches,
picnic tables
Civic Center
Campus
78495 Calle Tampico, 4.20
miles north of the project
17.5
Picnic tables, public art, restrooms, walking
paths, and water features
Sports Complex
78900 Park Avenue, 4.50
miles northwest of the
project
16.4
Ball fields, picnic tables, restrooms
Season's Park
78301 Calle Las Ramblas,
4.45 miles northwest of the
project
5.0
Playground, grass areas, dog park
Saguaro Park
Saguaro Road, 4.70 miles
northwest of the project
0.24
Playground, benches, grass areas, tables
La Quinta Park
78468 Westward Ho Dr.,
6.25 miles northwest of the
project
18.08
Playground, skate park, BBQs, water
features, picnic tables,
Desert Pride
Park
Birchcrest Circle, 6.60 miles
northwest of the project
1.06
Playground, grass area
Pioneer Park
78695 Miles Ave., 6.75 miles
northwest of project
3 22
Playground, grass areas, dog park, picnic
tables, benches
Monticello Park
Fred Waring Dr., 7.0 miles
north of the project
3.92
Playground, grass area, benches
Adams Park
78930 La Palma Dr., 7.0
miles north of the project
4 62
Playground, grass field, picnic tables,
benches
Source: La Quinta City website, "Parks" page, 2021.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-5
June 2021
4.12 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 4.12-6 lists the hiking
trails within the City.
Table 4.12-6 Hiking Trails within the City of La Quinta
Facility
Location
Miles
Boo Hoff Trail
0.75 miles west of the project
8.92
Cove to Lake Trail
3.40 miles northwest of project
2.41
Bear Creek
4.20 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 4.12-7 lists the City's public facilities and their distance from the proposed property.
Table 4.12-7 Public Facilities within the City of La Quinta
Facility
Location
Distance from Project
City Hall
78495 Calle Tampico
4.20 miles northwest
La Quinta Library
78275 Calle Tampico
4.30 miles northwest
La Quinta Museum
77885 Avenida Montezuma
4.40 miles northwest
City Hall
La Quinta City Hall is located at 78495 Calle Tampico, adjacent to the Civic Center Campus and near La
Quinta Village. City Hall 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. Per the La Quinta General Plan EIR, 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 is local history featuring
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-6 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
the Cahuilla Indians, The Desert Club, and The La Quinta Hotel. Gallery 2 features new revolving exhibits
that change every 3 to 4 months.
4.12.3 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.
Local
La Quinta General Plan
The La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) was adopted by the City of La Quinta pursuant to California
Government Code 65300 and its subsections. The LQGP provides long-term guidance and policies for
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-7 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
maintaining and improving the quality of life as well as the man-made and natural resources of the
community.
The LQGP's Parks, Recreation and Trails, Emergency Services, and Public Facilities Elements discuss the
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
Chapter 66477. This fee applies to all residential subdivisions of land, except subdivisions containing less
than five parcels and nonresidential subdivisions.
4.12.4 Project Impact Analysis
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-8 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
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 population and housing if it is
determined that the project will:
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?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other Public Utilities?
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.
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,
do not result in significant impacts. Typical for residential communities in the City of La Quinta, the
project and residential areas shall be gated, thus increasing community security and minimizing potential
crimes, and consistent with standard operations of resort communities, the proposed Hotel and Resort
Amenities 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 including streets, intersections, and other crosswalks.
Project Impacts
a. Impacts on:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-9 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection
Development of the proposed project may cause an incremental increase in demand for emergency
services; however, the size and location of the project is not expected to cause an undue hardship on
the fire department. The closest fire station to the project is Station 70, located 1.95 miles north of the
site, at 54001 Madison Street. The proposed project could be adequately served by fire protection
services within the 5 -7 -minute response time, and no new or expanded facilities would be required as a
result of the project. In order to continue to provide an acceptable level of service to this area, the County
Fire Department has preliminary plans for a future fire station to serve this portion of the City. First
response for fire protection services would primarily be from Fire Station 70. Additionally, the project
complies with the 2035 General Plan Emergency Services Policy ES -1.2 in that all new development
proposals are routed to the Fire Department to assure that project access and design provide for
maximum fire life safety.
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 comply
with Development Impact Fees (DIF) in place at the time of construction. The current DIF for detached
single-family residential is $9,380, which the City documented is adequate to mitigate any significant
impacts from new development. 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. The development of the future
fire station, whose location is being established by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City,
will be funded via the fire facilities component of the City's adopted DIF and the County's development
impact fees. The City's DIF ensures that the project will participate in the funding of the fire station in
proportion to its impact on fire facilities. As a result, impacts associated with fire services will be less
than significant.
The project proposes the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located
at 81600 Avenue 58. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right-
of-way. Construction activities of the offsite improvement may briefly impact emergency response times
on Avenue 58. Therefore, construction of the proposed offsite improvements will require the
implementation of Construction Traffic Control Plans (see Section 4.13, Transportation, for further
discussion). With the implementation of the Construction Traffic Control Plans, construction of the
offsite improvements will not significantly impact fire protection services and will cease once
construction of the offsite improvements are complete. Operation of the offsite improvement will be
integrated into the existing substation, whose fire suppression program is managed by IID. The addition
of the transformer bank will not change the site's fire suppression strategies, and impacts will be less
than significant.
Police protection
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-10 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
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. In 2013 the City had 51
sworn officers and 5 community service officers. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department maintains a
staffing ratio of 1.23 officers per 1,000 residents. Based on the City's current population of 40,660 the
current ratio is 1.25 officers per 1,000 residents. Project build -out could add approximately 1,698 new
residents to the City, based on the VMT Evaluation provided by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Appendix L.2).
This would result in a 1.2 officer per resident ratio, which exceeds the standard and accepted ratio of
one officer per 1,000 residents but is below the County of Riverside's standard ratio of 1.5 officers per
1,000 residents. However, the project will generate significant additional transient occupancy and sales
tax revenue to the City that can be used to expand the number of officers providing police services in
the City.
The development would occur within an area of existing residential uses, which is already being served
by the La Quinta Police Department. Additionally, the project complies with the 2035 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 indicates that the City shall 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, park and recreation facilities, major thoroughfares and bridges and traffic signalization, public
safety facilities and other public buildings. In addition, the project will generate substantial additional
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 and Citywide.
The impact to police services will be less than significant.
The project proposes the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located
at 81600 Avenue 58. Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right-
of-way. Construction activities of the offsite improvement may briefly impact response times of police
services on Avenue 58. Therefore, construction of the proposed offsite improvements will require the
implementation of Construction Traffic Control Plans (see Section 4.13, Transportation, for further
discussion). With the implementation of the Construction Traffic Control Plans, construction of the
offsite improvements will not significantly impact police protection services and will cease once
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-11 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
construction of the offsite improvements are complete. Operation of the transformer bank and
underground conduit would not result in any impacts to police services, as it is an automated activity
that is part of IID's operations.
Schools
As previously discussed, the project will result in a mixed-use development with up to 496 single family
detached units, 150 key resort hotel and 104 attached resort residential units. Per the California
Department of Finance, Population and Housing Estimates (2019), the City of La Quinta has 2.68 persons
per household (PPH). The residential portion of the project has the potential to generate 459 new
students based on the District's Student Generation Rate (Table 4.12-8).
Table 4.12-8 CVUSD District Wide Student Generation Rate
School Type
Dwelling Units
Generation Rate*
Students Generated**
Elementary School
600
0.3974
238
Middle School
600
0.1207
72
High School
600
0.2058
124
Total New Students
434
*Source: 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May 5, 2020.
**Students generated rounded.
Per the 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study, a capacity analysis was conducted for the 2019/2020 school
year and the District has excess capacity at its elementary and high school to accommodate students
from new development. Middle schools were over -capacity by 90 students for the 2019/2020 school
year. Assembly Bill 2926 and Senate Bill 50 (SB 50) allow school districts to collect development fees for
all new construction for residential/commercial and industrial use. Current CVUSD developer fees are
$4.08/sq.ft. for residential and $0.66/sq.ft. for commercial. Monies collected are used for construction
and reconstruction of school facilities. The legislation was enacted to mitigate the impacts to schools by
providing funds for the construction of additional facilities based on the additional demand created by
new development. The proposed project will be required to pay these fees for all development within
the project site, prior to the issuance of building permits. Payment of school fees by all new residential
development projects is considered "full and complete school facilities mitigation" of any school impacts
(Government Code section 65996). As such, agencies cannot require additional mitigation for any school
impacts. As a result, impacts to school services are considered to be less than significant.
The project proposes the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located
at 81600 Avenue 58. Neither the installation of the transformer bank and conduit, nor its operations,
will have any impact on school facilities, as the expanded equipment will be operated within IID's existing
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-12 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
substation, and will not require the addition of staff. 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 surf wave basin that will provide artificial waves for recreational
surfing and other water sports for project residents and club members. The project would also provide
approximately 24 acres of recreational open space that may also be used for low -impact active and
passive recreation activities, such as hiking, biking and ropes courses. Per the 2035 La Quinta General
Plan, the City has a policy of providing a minimum of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. The City currently
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 24 acres of recreational
open space as well as private recreational facilities within PA III. The project will result in 1,698 residents
on the project site. The project would provide a minimum of 14 acres of park land per 1,000 residents,
therefore exceeding the City's policy of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents.
The project will also be required to comply with the City's Development Impact Fees which includes a
Park and Recreation fee. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.
The project proposes the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation. The
installation and operation of a transformer bank and conduit will have no impact on park facilities,
because the improvements will be integrated into IID's existing substation, and no new residents will
result from this component of the project.
Other Public Facilities
The project proposes residential, resort, resort commercial, neighborhood commercial, and open space
recreational uses to the approximately 386 -acre site. In addition to the onsite improvements, the project
also proposes the installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation. Operation of
the offsite improvements will provide electrical service to the proposed project to support the future
population of the project site. The project could generate an additional 1,698 residents at full buildout.
This would be an increase of 4.2 percent of the City's current population of 40,660, and still below the
projected 2035 population forecast of 46,297. Residents and hotel guests will generate limited demand
for increased municipal 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 total potential increase in population, and fees and transient occupancy tax
generated by the project will offset any marginal increase to provide these services.
The project will not directly or indirectly induce substantial growth. As such, the proposed project will
not result in any substantial adverse physical impacts to existing schools, parks, or other public facilities.
Additionally, the project will not generate an increase in demand that would warrant the expansion or
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-13 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
construction of new public facilities. Therefore, impacts related to schools, parks, or other public facilities
would be less than significant.
4.12.5 Cumulative Impacts
Fire Protection
Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects in the area under buildout of the
General Plan would increase the demand for fire protection services over time, consistent with planned
growth and fire protection needs analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR. The project alone would
increase permanent and tourist populations. However, all future projects will be required to implement
all applicable fire safety requirements, to include installation of fire hydrants, and sprinkler systems.
Moreover, all future projects would be required to comply with Development Impact Fees (DIF) in place
at the time of construction. These fees are designed to mitigate the impact of new development on the
City's services 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 has preliminary plans for a future
fire station to serve this portion of the City. This will ensure fire services continue to be provided in the
City at appropriate response rates. The new fire station will be funded via the City's adopted
Development Impact Fee, which constitutes a "fair -share" contribution program used to fund additional
public facilities, including the planned future fire station in the southeastern La Quinta area. (See
Development Impact Fee Study dated September 23, 2019, and attached as Exhibit A to City Council
Resolution 2020-003, approved on February 4, 2020). Future developments in the City would also be
required to pay Development Impact Fees at the time they are constructed to ensure that their impacts
to fire services are not cumulatively significant. The proposed project's contribution will not be
cumulative considerable, and in fact, will help fund the additional fire station needed to serve future
planned growth in the area.
Police Protection
Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects in the area would further increase
the demand for police protection services over time. Future projects would increase permanent and
tourist populations; however, all projects would be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) in
place at the time of construction to reduce these impacts. The proposed project's contribution will not
be cumulative considerable.
Schools
It is expected that land designated for residential development in the City of La Quinta will be developed
in the future, increasing 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-14 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
services. The State -mandated payment of developer fees will help CVUSD expand its facilities to
accommodate students in the school district. The proposed project is estimated to generate a student
population of approximately 434 students and will be required to pay the developer fees to CVUSD. The
proposed project's contribution to school impacts will not be cumulative considerable. 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 are not cumulatively considerable.
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 24 acres of private open space recreation. 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. Impacts are not expected to be cumulatively
considerable.
Other Public Facilities
Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects in the area would increase the City's
demands on 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,
similar to the project, fees and taxes generated by future projects will ensure their impacts to other
public facilities are not cumulatively considerable.
4.12.6 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures are not required.
4.12.7 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of 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.
4.12.8 References
1. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Quimby Act, 2020.
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-15 June 2021
4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
5. City of La Quinta / Parks Website
6. Resolution No. 2020-003; Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, City of La
Quinta, September 2019; adopted February 2020.
7. 2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development,
May 5, 2018.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.12-16 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.13 Transportation
4.13 Transportation
4.13.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing setting and proposed improvements to intersections and roadways
required for the implementation of the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan ("SP" or "project"). This
section also evaluates the potential for the proposed SP to result in transportation and traffic impacts
within the Coachella Valley, the City of La Quinta and surrounding communities. This section is based on
the information contained in the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by
Urban Crossroads, October 2020, the Coral Mountain Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis (VMT)
Analysis, prepared by Urban Crossroads, November 2020, and the 2035 La Quinta General Plan
Circulation Element. The TIA and VMT Analysis are found in Appendix L.1 and L.2 of this Draft EIR.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines were revised to require the use of Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) as a replacement standard for automobile delay -based level of service (LOS). This is the
new measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. This statewide mandate was
implemented on July 1, 2020. To aid in this transition, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December of 2018)
("Technical Advisory").
The purpose of the TIA was to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from
the development of the proposed project and recommend improvements to achieve acceptable
circulation system operational conditions. As directed by City of La Quinta staff, this 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). To ensure that this TIA satisfies the
City of La Quinta's traffic study requirements, Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared a traffic study scoping
package for review by City staff prior to the preparation of this report. The Agreement provides an
outline of the project study area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology. The
Agreement approved by the City is included in Appendix 1.1. of the TIA, included as Appendix L.1 of this
Draft EIR.
4.13.2 Existing Conditions
Environmental Setting
The Coral Mountain Resort project is located at the southeast corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58
in the City of La Quinta. The site is currently undeveloped with desert vegetation of varying heights and
densities. The site has been subject to previous development and uses including agricultural and
residential land uses, dirt roads and hiking trails. The site has been cleared and graded of agricultural
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-1 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
vegetation. Exhibit 3-1, Existing Site Conditions, displays an aerial image of the project site's current
condition.
General Plan land use designations surrounding the project include Open Space — Natural to the west
and southwest and Low -Density Residential land uses to the north, south and east. Existing residential
communities occur to the north, south, and east. Avenue 58 and residential properties define the
project's northern boundary; Madison Street and the Andalusia community define the eastern
boundary; Coral Mountain defines the property's southwestern boundary; and vacant land and
residential properties define the southern and western boundaries.
Vehicular access to the project is provided by existing public arterial roads, including Avenue 60, Avenue
58 and Madison Street. The project will be required to widen and improve these roadways to their
ultimate General Plan half -width. Regional access to the site is provided by Interstate 10, Highway 111,
Madison Street, Monroe Street and other major arterials.
Roadway Facilities
Vehicular Access
According to the La Quinta General Plan, regional roadways that serve the city include State Highway
111 and 86, and Interstate 10 (1-10). Highway 111 begins at its juncture with Interstate 10 three miles
west of Palm Springs and extends southeast to Brawley in the Imperial Valley. Highway 86 connects the
planning area and other parts of the Coachella Valley with Imperial County and Mexico. Interstate 10
connects the Los Angeles region with Arizona and other cities and states to the east. These roadways
provide regional, interstate, and international connections for the City and the Coachella Valley.
The project site is situated in southwest portion of the City of La Quinta.
Proposed Project
The project consists of multiple applications that will result in the development of a master planned
themed resort, residential community and commercial center, comprised of a 16.62 acre Wave Basin, a
150 -key hotel and associated 57,000 square foot resort commercial village, 104 attached dwelling units,
496 detached dwelling units, a 60,000 square foot of neighborhood shopping center. The project is a
private facility.
The project is anticipated to be constructed in phases, with Phase 1 (2021/2022) including the resort
(Wave Basin, hotel uses, and 57,000 square feet of commercial uses), 104 attached dwelling units, 26
detached dwelling units, and 10,000 square feet of retail. Project Phase 2 (2023) adds 25,000 square feet
of retail. Project Phase 3 (2026) adds 470 detached dwelling units and 25,000 square feet of retail.
The applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of special events at this location involving attendance
of up to 2,500 guests per day (up to 4 events per year).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-2 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
The project is also required to make offsite site improvements for electrical power to the site. These
improvements would take place within IID's existing substation yard on Avenue 58 and in the right-of-
way on Avenue 58 between Andalusia and PGA West. The construction of the off-site improvements will
be temporary and will end once construction of the substation connection is complete.
The Coral Mountain Resort project is proposed to be served by the project access locations listed below
(see Exhibit 4.13-1, TIA Study Area):
• Madison Street / Main Access (#19) (full access)
• South Access (#18) / Avenue 60 (full access)
• Project Access 1(#20) / Avenue 58 (full access)
• Project Access 2 (#21) / Avenue 58 (right - in/right - out access)
• Madison Street / Project Access 3 (#22) (right - in/right - out access)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-3 June 2021
14
— — — _' AVENUE 58
>w�l�
I,
Low Density Residential
1±94DU
N
'Low Density Residential- (t_
w±26 DU
le a Olt
SSHEET MATCHLINE - r
SEE SHEET NO.2 �. � �1
Low Density Residential
±118 DU ,...a...,.�.. .. ` T
Si' w Low Density Residential
07.
_ „Cp,,,,,.0 „. ±136 DU .i
v+ esmr 1
44,
The Farm
i" -
_e, ''a \.
,.�rQ Nt`..
le+
N.T.S.
•
Low Density Residential..
±122 DU
U
CAILE ConcHNA
aaio`o Y
I
ya• ;AVENUE60
URBAN
cRDssRc A.L s
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
> PLANNING> CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
TIA STUDY AREA
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.13-1
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
4.13.3 Regulatory Setting
State Regulations
SB 743
Senate Bill (SB) 743, adopted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code Section 21099, required
changes to the CEQA guidelines regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. As a result of SB 743,
the recommended metric in the CEQA guidelines for transportation impacts is Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT). 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 Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released
a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018.) As required by SB
743, VMT replaced the former metric used to analyze traffic impacts, which was previously automobile
delay -based LOS. A statewide mandate was implemented on July 1, 2020. At this time lead agencies were
required to analyze CEQA traffic impacts using VMT. Automobile delay as measured by LOS was no longer
a methodology utilized to determine significance under CEQA. Lead agencies in Riverside County were
allowed to utilize OPR CAPCOA guidance, the County of Riverside guidance or develop their own
methodology. The City of La Quinta utilized the CAPCOA 2018 Guidance to prepare a policy which
established 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.
Regional and Local Setting
Regional Transportation Improvement Plan
The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is a multi -modal long-range planning document prepared by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in coordination with federal, state and other
regional, sub -regional, and local agencies in southern California. The RTP, prepared every three years,
addresses future needs based on a 20 -year projection. It includes programs and policies for congestion
management, transit, bicycle, pedestrians, roadway, 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 Plan (TIP), while locally funded
projects (off the State Highway System) are identified in local agency CIPs. To comply with Congestion
Management Plan (CMP) Statutes, regional CIP requirements are identified through the RCTC TIP
development process. Projects in the City's CIP may be incorporated into the Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP) for the programming of Flexible Congestion Relief (FCR) and Urban and
Commuter Rail funds.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-5 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
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 Riverside County
Transportation Commission (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).
According to the Riverside County Long Range Transportation Study (LRTS,) CMP legislation (AB 471, AB
1791, AB 1963 and AB 2419) established the process for designating the Congestion Management
Agency (CMA). RCTC was designated the CMA in 1990 by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and
a majority of cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated areas. The CMA has the
authority to monitor compliance with the adopted program. An amendment to the Government Code
requires the CMA to update and adopt the CMP every two years consistent with the development of the
Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP).
Over time, the State amended the language to allow for voluntary implementation of the CMP.
Subsequently AB32 and SB 375 were passed by the legislature that emphasized the reduction of
greenhouse gases by reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the development of a Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS) that each Metropolitan Planning Organization agency must prepare in
conjunction with its Regional Transportation Plan. Locally, RCTC continued implementing its half -cent
sales tax, Measure A, that provided for a list of projects and programs to relieve congestion. In addition,
Transportation Uniform Mitigation fee (TUMF) programs administered by the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments (CVAG) funded transportation improvements on arterials, highway
interchanges, grade separations and transit (discussed subsequently.)
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.) The following facilities are designated as part of the Riverside CMP System of Highways
and Roadways within 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)
• 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 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."
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-6 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Program
The CVAG administers the Coachella Valley Regional 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, imposes 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
funds for transportation system improvements projected to be needed over the next 25 years.
The TUMF is a development impact assessment that provides funding for transportation improvements
required to support new development based on the number of vehicle trips new development will
generate. Approximately 55 percent of the funding provided by CVAG consists of TUMF funds with the
remainder consisting of Measure A funds. CVAG prepares the Transportation Project Priority Study
(TPPS) every 5 five years to determine funding availability for improvements to regional arterials by
prioritizing the eligible study segments based on an assessment of the need for improvement.
Available TUMF and Measure A revenues are applied to TPPS projects in order of priority. Because a
project's priorities set out in the TPPS control the order of funding, it also generally controls the
approximate timeframe for each project.
To conform to CVAG policies, all CVAG member agencies require the construction of adopted road
construction standard improvements for missing regional road segments located adjacent to land
development projects.
City of La Quinta
La Quinta Capital Improvement Program
The City's 5 -year CIP is a planning instrument used by the City to identify capital improvements needs
and to coordinate financing and timing of those needs in a manner that maximized 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 upon the systematic development of an accompanying financial plan. The
CIP includes roadway improvements and traffic signal installation and upgrades, as well as other City
projects. Area Roadway System
Roads within the Study Area are a combination of Primary Arterials (Madison Street, Avenue 52, Avenue
54, Airport Blvd), and Secondary Arterials (Avenue 58, Avenue 60). For the 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-7 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
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
coincide 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, and
extending into the proposed project, are planned to be a Class II Golf Cart/NEV path and multi -use path.
Transit Service
The City of La Quinta is currently served by the SunLine Transit Agency, but bus facilities are not located
within 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.
Truck Access
The City's existing truck routes include several streets within the project study area. Truck access to the
study area is provided via Madison Street, Monroe Street, Jackson Street, Airport Boulevard, Avenue 58,
and Avenue 60.
4.13.4 Project Impact Analysis
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 proposed project 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 Transportation Analysis Policy (Policy)
La Quinta's Transportation Analysis Policy (Policy) was adopted in June 2020. This Policy aligns the City's
transportation analysis with California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and the City's goals as set forth in the City
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-8 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
of La Quinta's General Plan. This policy 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 which was LOS.
VMT
Based on OPR's Technical Advisory, the City of La Quinta has prepared their Vehicle Miles Traveled
Analysis Policy (City Guidelines). The project specific VMT Analysis was prepared based on the adopted
City Guidelines. The City Guidelines are consistent with the VMT analysis methodology recommended
by OPR. As outlined in the City 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.
Level of Service
Prior to SB 743, a significant traffic impact would occur if the addition of project -generated trips caused
an intersection to change from an acceptable LOS to a deficient LOS, or if project traffic increased 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 City has adopted 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.
However, the use of VMT as the metric for evaluating traffic impacts under CEQA replaces the earlier
practice of evaluating traffic primarily on LOS. Now, vehicle delay as measured by LOS or similar
standards cannot be considered a significant impact on the environment in CEQA transportation
evaluations. Therefore the LOS roadway analysis and construction traffic impact analysis provided here
is for informational purposes only, and to ensure consistency with General Plan policies, and is not used
as a basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA, consistent with the
requirements of SB 743.
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 in order to
determine whether the signal is truly justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-9 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
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
A detailed traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for the proposed project by Urban Crossroads,
October 27, 2020. The TIA was based upon an analysis of existing roadway conditions in the project
vicinity, a variety of traffic count sources (including peak hour counts collected by the consulting traffic
engineers), the General Plan Circulation Element, planned roadway improvements and other data and
information. The TIA provides documentation and analysis of existing traffic conditions, trips generated
by the project, distribution of the project trips to roads outside the project, 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 15th, 2017, April 9th, 2019, May 7th, 2019, and September
10, 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)
A 20% increase was applied to counts taken in August, 5% increase was applied to counts taken in April,
and 10% increase is applied to counts taken in May, and a 15% increase was applied to September per
City of La Quinta's EB#06-13. There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical
traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity that would prevent or limit roadway
access and detour routes. The average AM/PM peak hour intersection growth between 2017 and 2019
counts data at selected study area and nearby intersections was approximately 2.66%. The additional
2.66% growth rate was applied to the study area intersections with 2017 counts to reflect 2019
conditions. 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).
ADT volumes were estimated using the formula below for each intersection leg and compared to the
2017 ADT's with 2.66% growth to reflect 2019 conditions, where 2019 counts are unavailable:
Weekday PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 9.753 = Leg Volume
For those roadway segments which have 24-hour tube count data available in close proximity to the
study area, a comparison between the PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes indicated that the peak -
to -daily relationship of approximately 9.30 percent would sufficiently estimate average daily traffic (ADT)
volumes for planning -level analyses. As such, the above equation utilizing a factor of 9.753 estimates
the ADT volumes on the study area roadway segments assuming a peak -to -daily relationship of
approximately 9.30 percent (i.e., 1/0.0930 = 9.753).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-10 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
The 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, and in
consultation with City staff during the scoping process. The analysis also considered the General Plan.
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 4.13-1.
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
ofAthrough F identifying its level of capacity utilization and relative level of congestion. LOSA 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 4.13-1
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.
According to the City of La Quinta Circulation Element, for roadway segment travel, LOS is a measure of
the flow of traffic; while for intersections, the LOS is based on the number of seconds the vehicle is
delayed in passing through the intersection. The Element further states that although accepting a lower
level of service (LOS E or even F) at certain intersections and segments during peak season may result in
periodic congestion, once familiar with network constraints, travelers will seek alternative paths and
traffic will be distributed to those parts of the network with surplus capacity.
Table 4.13-2 illustrates the accepted capacity of typical street types.
Table 4.13-2 Roadway Segment Capacity Thresholds
Roadway Classification
Lane Configuration
Capacity (Vehicles per Day)
Local
2 -Lane Undivided
9,000
Collector
2 -Lane Undivided
14,000
Modified Secondary
2 -Lane Divided
19,000
Secondary
4 -Lane Undivided
28,000
Primary
4 -Lane Divided
42,600
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-11
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
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. 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. Where signal timing was unavailable, the local accepted standards were
utilized in lieu of actual signal timing.
TIA Analysis
The potential impacts to traffic and circulation were evaluated for each of the following conditions:
• Existing (2019) Conditions
• Existing Plus Project (E+P)
• Existing Plus Ambient Growth plus Project (EAP)
• Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects without (EAC) and with Project (EAPC) for
each of the following phases:
o Project Phase 1 (2021)
o Project Phase 2 (2023)
o Project Buildout (Phase 3, 2026)
o Project Buildout (Phase 3, 2026) — Special Event
• General Plan buildout (2040) Without Project Conditions — establishes future year baseline to
evaluate the proposed Project.
• General Plan buildout (2040) With Project Conditions — represents future year baseline traffic
conditions with the proposed project.
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)
A total of 22 intersections were evaluated for their current and future operating conditions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-12 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-3 Intersections ID and Location
ID
Intersection Location
ID
Intersection Location
1
Madison Street / Avenue 58
12
Monroe Street / Avenue 58
2
Madison Street / Avenue 56
13
Monroe Street / Airport Boulevard
3
Madison Street / Avenue 54
14
Monroe Street / Avenue 54
4
Madison Street / Avenue 52
15
Monroe Street / Avenue 52
5
Madison Street / Avenue 50
16
Monroe Street / 50th Avenue
6
Jefferson Street / Avenue 54
17
Jackson Street / 58th Avenue
7
Jefferson Street / Avenue 52
18
South Access / Avenue 60 — (Future Intersection)
8
Jefferson Street / Pomelo
19
Madison Street / Main Access — (Future Intersection)
9
Jefferson Street / Avenue 50
20
Project Access 1 / Avenue 58 - (Future Intersection)
10
Madison Street / Avenue 60
21
Project Access 2 / Avenue 58 — (Future Intersection)
11
Monroe Street / Avenue 60
22
Madison Street / Project Access 3 — (Future Intersection)
A total of 6 roadway segments were evaluated for their current and future operating conditions.
Table 4.13-4 Roadway Segments
ID
Roadway Segment
ID
Roadway Segment
1
Avenue 58, west of Madison Street
4
Madison Street, south of Airport Boulevard
2
Avenue 58, west of Monroe Street
5
Avenue 60, west of Monroe Street
3
Avenue 58, west of Jackson Street
6
Monroe Street, south of Airport Boulevard
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.
A potentially significant cumulative impact at an unsignalized study area intersection is defined to occur
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-13 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-5 Unsignalized Intersection Description of LOS
Description
Average Control Delay
Per Vehicle (Seconds)
Level of Service,
V/C <_ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C > 1.0
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 4.13-6, Required Intersection Levels of Service and Table 4.13-7,
Impact Criteria for Intersections Already Operations show the LOS criteria used in the analysis of the
project.
Table 4.13-6 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
Source: Coral Mountain Specific Plan TIA, Urban Crossroads, October 2020.
Table 4.13-7
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
Source: Coral Mountain Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads 2020
Required Roadway Segment Conditions
A potentially significant cumulative 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 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-14 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
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 in order 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.
Existing (2019) Conditions
The project is located at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street on approximately 386
acres.
The segment of Avenue 58 that is adjacent to the project is designated as a Secondary roadway (4 -Lane
Undivided.) Madison Street is also designated as a Secondary roadway (4 -Lane Undivided) and Avenue
60 is designated as a two-lane Collector roadway (2 -Lane Undivided).
Secondary streets are four -lane undivided roadways with parking and a typical right of way of 102 -feet.
Collector streets are defined as two-lane, undivided roadways with an 80 foot right of way. Class II Bicycle
Paths are proposed along Avenue 58, Avenue 60 and Madison Street. Class II Bicycle Paths are on road
striped bicycle lanes.
Avenue 58 is currently an east/west paved roadway, with three lanes. The north portion contains two
paved lanes, a bike lane, and curb, gutter, a meandering sidewalk and landscape parkway. The south
side adjacent to the project is paved with one through lane and a paved shoulder. Madison Street is
currently paved with 4 -lanes, landscaped median, bike lanes and curb and gutter on both sides of the
roadway along most of the project frontage. Avenue 60 is currently paved, with two lanes, curb and
gutter from the intersection of Madison Street to approximately 660 feet to the west, where it
transitions into a dirt roadway, terminating at the project's frontage and ultimately US Bureau of
Reclamation Dike 4.
The study area has existing pedestrian and bicycle paths along sections of surrounding and nearby
streets. Jefferson Street, Madison Street, Monroe Street, Avenue 50, Avenue 52, Avenue 54, Airport
Boulevard, Avenue 58, Avenue 60 and Avenue 62 are planned to include a Class II Golf Cart/NEV path
and Multi -use path. Avenue 58 currently has an existing sidewalk and on -street bike lane on the north
side of the street. Madison Street currently has an existing on -street bike lane on both sides, and a
partially developed meandering multi -use path on its east side, which occurs adjacent to Andalusia's
developed areas and will be extended with that project's build out.
As shown in Table 4.13-8, 22 area intersections were analyzed in the TIA and all 17 existing intersections
are currently operating at LOS D or better.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-15 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Existing Intersection Level of Service
Table 4.13-8 Intersection Analysis for Existing (2019) Conditions *
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control
(Note 3)
Intersection Approach Lanes
(Note 1)
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
8.5
9.3
A
A
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
8.8
8.4
A
A
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
12.9
15.9
B
C
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
27.9
28.5
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
28.6
29.4
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
12.2
16.9
B
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
RDB
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
9.4
9.7
A
A
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
8.4
14.3
A
B
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
46.3
49.4
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/0/1
8.2
9.1
A
A
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/1
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
8.1
8.3
A
A
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!0
0/11/0
8.1
9.4
A
A
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/1!/0
8.5
9.2
A
A
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
14.3
12.7
B
B
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
AWS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
14.7
25.3
B
D
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
16.6
18.0
B
B
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0/11/0
0/1!/0
0/11/0
0/1!/0
7.5
8.2
A
A
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
Intersection Does Not Exist
19
Madison St/Main Access
Intersection Does Not Exist
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
Intersection Does Not Exist
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
Intersection Does Not Exist
22
Madison /Project Access 3
Intersection Does Not Exist
1.
When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient
for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-16 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Existing Roadway Forecasts Summary
Traffic Signal Warrants for existing traffic conditions indicate that, based on existing peak hour
intersection turning volumes, the following 4 unsignalized study area intersections currently warrant a
traffic signal.
• Madison Street at Avenue 54 (#3)
• Jefferson Street at Avenue 54 (#6)
• Monroe Street at Avenue 54 (#14)
• Monroe Street at Avenue 52 (#15)
Table 4.13-9 Indicates that all existing study roadway segments currently operate with acceptable levels.
Table 4.13-9 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis For Existing (2019) Conditions
Roadway
Segment
Roadway
Designation
Through
Travel Lanes
(note 1)
Capacity
(note 2)
ADT
(note 3)
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio
Avenue 58
West of Madison St.
Secondary
3
21,000
1,600
0.08
West of Monroe St.
Secondary
4
28,000
2,300
0.08
West of Jackson St.
Secondary
2
28,000
1,800
0.13
Madison St.
South of Airport Blvd
Primary
4
42,600
6,700
0.16
Avenue 60
West of Monroe Blvd
Secondary
3
28,000
3,200
0.15
Monroe St.
South of Airport Blvd
Primary
3
42,600
3,400
0.11
1. Existing Number of Through Lanes; 1 = City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout number of lanes.
2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (Oct 2017)
3. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day.
General Plan LOS consistency is analyzed in section a) below, while VMT is analyzed in section b) of this
Transportation discussion.
Project Impact
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Project 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), Multifamily Housing (Code
220), Resort Hotel (Code 330), and Shopping Center (Code 820) are used. The Wave Basin component of
the project is considered a private recreational facility. Trip generation rates for the Wave Basin facility
are based on data from the San Diego Association of Governments recreational park (developed) rates.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-17 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
For the resort -related commercial area, ITE land use code 861 (sporting goods store) has been utilized
and the Farm area, ITE land use code 495 (recreational community center) has been utilized.
Table 4.13-10 illustrates the Trip Generation Summary for the project based on ITE Land Use
classifications.
Table 4.13-10 Trip Generation Summary
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
ITE LU
Code
Quantit
y
(note 2)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family Detached
210
496 DU
0.19
0.55
0.74
0.62
0.37
0.99
9.44
Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise)
220
104 DU
0.11
0.35
0.46
0.35
0.21
0.56
7.32
Resort Hotel (note 5)
(with bar, restaurant, kitchen,
rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, and spa.
Back of house resort operations
included)
330
150 RM
0.27
0.10
0.37
0.20
0.27
0.47
7.87
Shopping Center
820
10 TSF
0.58
0.36
0.94
1.83
1.98
3.81
37.75
Wave Basin Facility (note 6)
(Back of house wave operations
included)
(Note 4)
12 AC
1.20
0.80
2.00
2.40
1.60
4.00
50.00
Wave Village (Studio/Retail) (note 7)
(with shape studio, surf shop, board
room, surf lounge/living room, surf
classroom, fitness pavilion, high
performance center, & beach club)
861
15 TSF
0.27
0.07
0.34
0.97
1.05
2.02
28.75
The Farm (Recreational
Area/Clubhouse) (note 8)
(with Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment
Barn, Tool Shed, Family Camp, Gym,
Outfitters, and Locker Rooms)
495
16 TSF
1.16
0.60
1.76
1.09
1.22
2.31
28.82
1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).
2. DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Occupied Room
3. Pass -by Source: Shops at Coral Mountain TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (November 2009)
4. Since ITE does not have trip rates for a wave pool facility, similar use based on SANDAG's recreation park (developed peak hour and
daily rates) are utilized.
5. Hotel trip rates account for 23.5 tsf of ancillary facilities which include bar, restaurant, kitchen, rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, spa,
and back of house resort operations.
6. The Wave Basin Facility trip rates account for pool area and 1.5 tsf of back of house wave operations.
7. Wave Village trip rates account for 15 tsf of ancillary facilities which include shape studio, surf shop, board room, surf lounge/livi
ng room, surf classroom, fitness pavilion, high performance center, & beach club.
8. The Farm trip rates account for 16 tsf of ancillary facilities which include Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment Barn, Tool Shed, Family C
amp, Gym, Outfitters, & Locker Rooms.
9. The 1 tsf back of house guardhouse use is accounted for in the Project rates.
The project will be gated and private, with the exception of the neighborhood commercial project at the
northeast corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, so reasonable assumptions regarding internal/pass-
by interactions between these uses are included in the trip generation calculations. The Wave Basin
facility will be utilized by hotel guests, but outside trip generation is also included for employee trips at
the hotel, resort commercial village and Wave Basin. Area residents and visitors will use the commercial
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-18 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
retail area located at the northeast corner of the project, which will not be restricted to project residents
and hotel guests (which typically include merchandise, service station and restaurant land uses). The
total internal/pass-by trip ends were adjusted in a manner to ensure that no "double counting" occurs
before assigning the project trips to the roadway network.
Phase 1 (2021)
As shown on Table 4.13-11, Phase 1 (2021) of the proposed project is anticipated to generate a net total
of 2,227 external trip - ends per day on a typical weekday with 114 external vehicles per hour (VPH)
during the weekday AM peak hour and 151 external VPH during the weekday PM peak hour.
Table 4.13-11 Phase 1 (2021)
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
ITE LU
Code
Quantity
(note 2)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family Detached
210
220
26 DU
104 RM
5
14
19
16
10
26
245
Multifamily Housing (Low-
Rise)
11
36
47
36
22
58
761
Internal to Retail/Resort
(2)
(3)
(5)
(9)
(7)
(16)
(141)
Residential External Trips
14
47
61
43
25
68
865
Shopping Center
820
10 TSF
6
4
10
18
20
38
378
Pass -By (25%)
(1)
(1)
(2)
(5)
(5)
(10)
(95)
Internal to
Residential/Resort
(3)
(3)
(6)
(4)
(4)
(8)
(72)
Shopping Center External Trips
2
0
2
_
9
11
_ _
20
211
Resort Hotel
330
150 RM
41
15
56
30
41
71
1,181
Internal to Residential/Retail
(7)
(8)
(15)
(11)
(17)
(28)
(324)
Resort Hotel External Trips
34
7
41
_
19
_
24
_
43
857
Wave Basin Facility
(note 4)
12 AC
14
10
24
29
19
48
600
Internal to
Residential/Retail/Resort
(8)
(6)
(14)
(16)
(12)
(28)
(306)
Wave Basin Facility External Trips
6
4
10
13
7
20
294
Wave Village
861
15 TSF
3
2
5
16
15
31
431
Internal to Residential/Resort
(1)
(1)
(2)
(7)
(7)
(14)
(168)
Wave Village External Trips
2
1
[ 3 9
8
17
263
The Farm
495
16 TSF
18
11
29
18
19
37
461
Internal to
Residential/Retail/Resort
(9)
(6)
(15)
(9)
(11)
(20)
(240)
The Farm External Trips
9
5
14
9
8
17
221
Project Subtotal
98
92
190
163
146
309
4,057
Internal Capture Subtotal
(37)
(37)
(74)
(74)
(74)
(148)
(1,735)
Pass -By (Shopping Center)
(1)
(1)
(2)
(5)
(5)
(10)
(95)
Total
56
58
114
84
67
151
2,227
1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).
2. DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Occupied Room
3. Pass -by Source: Shops at Coral Mountain TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (November 2009)
4. Since ITE does not have trip rates for a wave pool facility, similar use based on SANDAG's recreation park (developed peak hour and
daily rates) are utilized.
5. Hotel trip rates account for 23.5 tsf of ancillary facilities which include bar, restaurant, kitchen, rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, spa, and
back of house resort operations.
6. The Wave Basin Facility trip rates account for pool area and 1.5 tsf of back of house wave operations.
7. Wave Village trip rates account for 15 tsf of ancillary facilities which include shape studio, surf shop, board room, surf lounge/living r
oom, surf classroom, fitness pavilion, high performance center, & beach club.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.13-19
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
8. The Farm trip rates account for 16 tsf of ancillary facilities which include Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment Barn, Tool Shed, Family Camp
, Gym, Outfitters, & Locker Rooms.
9. The 1 tsf back of house guardhouse use is accounted for in the Project rates.
Phase 2 (2023)
Table 4.13-12 shows trip generation for Phase 2 of the proposed project, which is anticipated to generate
a net total of 2,778 external trip -ends per day on a typical weekday with 123 external vehicles per hour
(VPH) during the weekday AM peak hour and 208 external VPH during the weekday PM peak hour.
Table 4.13-12 Phase 2 (2023)
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
ITE LU
Code
Quantity
(note 2)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family Detached
210
220
26 DU
104 RM
5
14
19
16
10
26
245
Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise)
11
36
47
36
22
58
761
Internal to Retail/Resort
(2)
(5)
(7)
(10)
(8)
(18)
(158)
Residential External Trips
14
45
59
42
24
66
848
Shopping Center
820
35 TSF
20
13
33
64
69
133
1,321
_
Pass -By (25%)
(4)
(4)
(8)
(16)
(16)
(32)
(330)
Internal to Residential/Resort
(5)
(4)
(9)
(8)
(8)
(16)
(144)
Shopping Center External Trips
11
5
16
40
45
85
847
Resort Hotel
330
150 RM
41
15
56
30
41
71
1,181
Internal to Residential/Retail
(8)
(8)
(16)
(13)
(19)
(32)
(370)
Resort Hotel External Trips
33
7
40
17
22
39
811
Wave Basin Facility
(note 4)
12 AC
14
10
24
29
19
48
600
Internal to
Residential/Retail/Resort
(9)
(7)
(16)
(17)
(13)
(30)
(328)
Wave Basin Facility External Trips
5
3
8
12
6
18
272
Wave Village
861
15 TSF
3
2
5
16
15
31
431
Internal to Residential/Resort
(1)
(1)
(2)
(7)
(7)
(14)
(168)
Wave Village External Trips
2
1
3
9
8
17 263
The Farm
495
16 TSF
18
11
29
18
19
37
461
Internal to
Residential/Retail/Resort
(9)
(6)
(15)
(9)
(11)
(20)
(240)
The Farm External Trips
9
5
14
9
8
17
221
Project Subtotal
112
101
213
209
195
404
5,000
Internal Capture Subtotal
(41)
(41)
(82)
(82)
(82)
(164)
(1,892)
Pass -By (Shopping Center)
(4)
(4)
(8)
(16)
(16)
(32)
(330)
Total
67
56
123
111
97
208
2,778
1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017).
2. DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Occupied Room
3. Pass -by Source: Shops at Coral Mountain TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (November 2009)
4. Since ITE does not have trip rates for a wave pool facility, similar use based on SANDAG's recreation park (developed peak hour and
daily rates) are utilized.
5. Hotel trip rates account for 23.5 tsf of ancillary facilities which include bar, restaurant, kitchen, rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, spa, and
back of house resort operations.
6. The Wave Basin Facility trip rates account for pool area and 1.5 tsf of back of house wave operations.
7. Wave Village trip rates account for 15 tsf of ancillary facilities which include shape studio, surf shop, board room, surf lounge/living r
oom, surf classroom, fitness pavilion, high performance center, & beach club.
8. The Farm trip rates account for 16 tsf of ancillary facilities which include Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment Barn, Tool Shed, Family Camp
, Gym, Outfitters, & Locker Rooms.
9. The 1 tsf back of house guardhouse use is accounted for in the Project rates.
Phase 3 (2026) Project Buildout
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-20 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
As shown on Table 4.13-13, at project buildout, the site is anticipated to generate a net total of 6,994
external trip -ends per day on a typical weekday with 447 external vehicles per hour (VPH) during the
weekday AM peak hour and 638 external VPH during the weekday PM peak hour.
Table 4.13-13 Project Buildout (2026)
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
ITE LU
Code
Quantity
(note 2)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family Detached
210
220
496 DU
104 RM
94
273
367
308
184
492
4,682
Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise)
11
36
47
36
22
58
761
Internal to Retail/Resort
(10)
(20)
(30)
(40)
(29)
(69)
(595)
Residential External Trips
95
289
384
_
304
177
481
_
4,848
Shopping Center
820
60 TSF
35
22
57
_
110
119
229
_
2,265
Pass -By (25%)
(7)
(7)
(14)
(28)
(28)
(56)
(566)
Internal to Residential/Resort
(9)
(7)
(16)
(21)
(35)
(56)
(448)
Shopping Center External Trips
19
8
27
61
56
117
1,251
Resort Hotel
330
150 RM
41
15
56
30
41
71
1,181
Internal to Residential/Retail
(14)
(10)
(24)
(15)
(21)
(36)
(416)
Resort Hotel External Trips
27
5
32
15
20
35
765
Wave Basin Facility
(note 4)
12 AC
14
10
24
29
19
48
600
Internal to
Residential/Retail/Resort
(12)
(8)
(20)
(26)
(17)
(43)
(470)
Wave Basin Facility External Trips
2
2
4
3
2
5
130
Wave Village
861
15 TSF
3
2
5
16
15
31
431
(1)
(1)
(2)
(7)
(7)
(14)
(168)
Wave Village External Trips
2
1
3
9
8
17
263
The Farm
495
16 TSF
18
11
29
18
19
37
461
(9)
(6)
(15)
(9)
(11)
(20)
(240)
The Farm External Trips
9
5
14
9
8
17
221
Project Subtotal
216
369
585
547
419
966
10,381
Internal Capture Subtotal
(62)
(62)
(124)
(136)
(136)
(272)
(2,821)
Pass -By (Shopping Center)
(7)
(7)
(14)
(28)
(28)
(56)
(566)
Total
143
304
447
383
255
638
6,994
1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Eng'neers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition 2017).
2. DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Occupied Room
3. Pass -by Source: Shops at Coral Mountain TIA, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (November 2009)
4. Since ITE does not have trip rates for a wave pool facility, similar use based on SANDAG's recreation park (developed peak hour
and daily rates are utilized.
5. Hotel trip rates account for 23.5 tsf of ancillary facilities which include bar, restaurant, kitchen, rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, spa,
and back of house resort operations.
6. The Wave Basin Facility trip rates account for pool area and 1.5 tsf of back of house wave operations.
7. Wave Village trip rates account for 15 tsf of ancillary facilities which include shape studio, surf shop, board room, surf
lounge/living room, surf classroom, fitness pavilion, high performance center, & beach club.
8. The Farm trip rates account for 16 tsf of ancillary facilities which include Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment Barn, Tool Shed, Family
Camp, Gym, Outfitters, & Locker Rooms.
9. The 1 tsf back of house guardhouse use is accounted for in the Project rates.
Trip distributions for both the residential and commercial operations is depicted in Exhibit 4.13-2 and
Exhibit 4.13-3.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-21 June 2021
N.T.S.
10 119- 5
-AVENUE 50
POMELO --�
/(
15
CITY OF LA QUINTA
50TH AV.
AVENUE 52
N
AVENUE 54
5
ONSITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION
AVENUE 58
z
0
0
2
0
Ln
_L
o� �I
\�.... aw
naPROJECT Jai
- - ACGESS553 1!I
SITE
MAIN
pCCESS
10
IS 0 o
30
10
0
0
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT
= FUTURE ROADWAY
= RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLY ACCESS
URBAN
CRDSSRonoS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
>
PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
PROJECT RESIDENTIAL AND RESORT
EXTERNAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.13-2
LJ u
AVENUE 50
50
/1
IIS i I
AVENUE 52
AVENUE 54
CITY OF LA QIIINTA
? NI
r1. f
;AVENUE 58 f`
I r I,
I
I
yam/
tI S.ACCESS
10
N.T.S.
\I
1
11
_____ AVENUE _60
58TH AV.
i 60TH AV.
JACKSON ST.
5
ON-SITE OUTBOUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION
25
cu
as
AVENUE 58
N
o 0
0
_ _15 r,
15 N 30 15 5
w vii V1
\90 o u {
iQ PROJECT
ACCESS 3
.............. ........ .
20
........ ...............
.............. ........ .
F. .
SITE
MAIN
ACCESS
5
20
ON-SITE INBOUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION
30
AVENUE 58
0
Ij
0
N
s
20
LEGEND:
10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT
= FUTURE ROADWAY
= RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLY ACCESS
URBAN
CRDSSRonos
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
>
PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
PROJECT SHOPPING CENTER
EXTERNAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.13-3
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Future Traffic Conditions
Future traffic conditions were evaluated, to include existing traffic, ambient growth, and other
developments in the area. Future "with project" conditions analyzed project traffic plus existing ambient
growth plus cumulative traffic conditions.
TIA Access Improvement Recommendations
The Coral Mountain Resort project is proposed to be served by the project access locations listed below:
• Madison Street / Main Access (#19) (full access)
• South Access (18) / Avenue 60 (full access)
• Project Access 1(#20) / Avenue 58 (full access)
• Project Access 2 (#21) / Avenue 58 (right - in/right - out access)
• Madison Street / Project Access 3 (#22) (right - in/right - out access)
The separation between project driveways along Avenue 58 (#20 and #21) and Madison Street (#22) is
over 250 feet and separation between Avenue 58 and the project's main access point (#19) (future
signalized location) is over 600 feet. The location of each project access points meets City of La Quinta
intersection spacing standards.
TIA Analysis Scenarios
Existing Plus Project (E+P) and EAP
Table 4.13-14: The Existing plus Project (E+P) traffic conditions analysis determines circulation system
deficiencies that would occur on the existing roadway system if the project were added to Existing traffic
conditions. The Existing plus Ambient growth (EAP) scenario includes the entire project and seven years
of background growth. To account for background traffic growth, ambient growth was included for EAP
(2026) traffic conditions. Cumulative development projects were not included as part of the EAP
Analysis.
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. Under E+P conditions, the 22
(17 existing and the 5 project intersections) study area intersections are anticipated to continue to
operate at acceptable LOS with the addition of project traffic.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-24 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-14 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Project (E -FP)
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control
(Note 3)
Intersection Approach Lanes
(Note 1)
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
10.0
12.8
A
B
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
8.8
9.9
A
A
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
15.2
23.5
C
C
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
29.1
30.0
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
29.1
29.8
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
13.2
20.1
B
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
RDB
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
10.6
11.2
A
A
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
8.8
14.3
A
B
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
46.5
49.4
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/0/1
8.7
9.5
A
A
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/1
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
8.5
8.9
A
A
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/110
0/11/0
8.9
11.0
A
A
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
9.0
10.0
A
A
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
AWS
0/1!/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/11/0
16.3
14.4
B
B
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
AWS
0/1!/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
16.8
34.3
B
D
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
16.6
18.5
B
B
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0/1!/0
0/11/0
0/1!/0
0/11/0
7.7
8.6
A
A
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
0/110
0/J0
8.9
8.9
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
1/2/0
0/2/0
11O/1
0/0/0
12.7
15.6
B
C
20
Project Access 1/Ave.58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
1*/2/0
9.2
9.8
A
A
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
8.6
9.0
A
A
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
8.9
10.1
A
B
1.
When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient
for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 1= Improvement
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way turn lane
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-25 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-15 Roadway Volume/Capacity Analysis For E+P Conditions
Roadway
Segment
Roadway
Designation
Through
Travel Lanes
(note 1)
Capacity
(note 2)
ADT
(note 3)
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio
Avenue 58
West of Madison St.
Secondary
3
28,0004
2,300
0.11
West of Monroe St.
Secondary
4
28,000
4,100
0.15
West of Jackson St.
Secondary
2
14,0004
2,700
0.19
Madison St.
South of Airport Blvd
Primary
4
42,600
9,700
0.23
Avenue 60
West of Monroe Blvd
Secondary
3
21,0004
4,500
0.21
Monroe St.
South of Airport Blvd
Primary
3
31,9505
4,400
0.14
1. Existing Number of Through Lanes; 1 = City of La Qu'nta General Plan Buildout number of lanes.
2. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (Oct 2017)
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
The traffic signal warrant analysis further found that under E+P traffic conditions, two study intersections
are anticipated to require installation of a traffic signal (which are funded in the CIP) in order to maintain
acceptable LOS under E+P conditions. (#6 Jefferson Street/Avenue 54; and #15 Monroe Street/Avenue
52.). As shown in Table 4.13-16 because the project will contribute to the need for signalization, the
project's share of these improvements will be 1%.
Table 4.13-16 E+P Fair Share Contributions
Intersection #
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (E+P)
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
1%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
1%
All but 5 study roadway intersections analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for EAP
without Project traffic conditions. All but 6 study roadway intersections analyzed are anticipated to
operate at acceptable LOS for EAP with Project traffic conditions. Proposed improvements will result in
all study intersections operating at acceptable LOS. Table 4.13-17 illustrates that following proposed
improvements, intersections will operate with acceptable LOS.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-26 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-17 Intersection Analysis for Existing Plus Ambient Without and With Project (EAP)
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control
(Note 3)
Intersection Approach Lanes
(Note 1)
EA (2026) Without
Project
EA (2026) With Project
North-
bound
South-
bound
East-
bound
West-
bound
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
9.7
12.1
A
B
11.9
19.9
B
C
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
10.0
11.4
A
B
10.0
11.4
A
B
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
41.4
>80
E
F
57.7
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
35.6
36.1
D
D
36.9
38.2
D
D
4
Madison St./Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
30.2
31.3
C
C
31.0
32.2
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
31.0
32.1
C
C
31.3
23.4
C
C
6
Jefferson St./Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
18.7
72.4
C
F
22.2
>80
C
F
-With Improvements
TS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1>
24.4
25.0
C
C
24.7
25.5
C
C
7
Jefferson St./Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
RDB
0.5/0.5/1
/»
0.5/0.5/1/
»
0.5/0.5/
1/»
0.5/0.5/
1/»
18.5
36.7
C
E
21.9
40.4
C
E
-With Improvements
RDB
0.5/1.5/1
/»
0.5/1.5/1/
»
0.5/0.5/
1/»
0.5/0.5/
1/»
7.8
8.6
A
A
8.3
9.5
A
A
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/
1
0.5/0.5/
1
8.0
14.0
A
B
10.6
14.4
B
B
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
46.6
50.4
D
D
46.8
50.4
D
D
10
Madison St./Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/
0
0/1/1
8.9
11.0
A
B
9.5
11.9
A
B
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/1
0.5/0.5/
1
0/11/0
9.5
10.9
A
B
10.0
12.1
B
B
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!0
0/11/0
9.8
20.1
A
C
11.2
39.8
B
E
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!0
0/11/0
22.1
23.0
C
C
24.4
24.5
C
C
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
10.6
15.4
B
C
11.5
18.8
B
C
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
50.7
70.1
F
F
66.1
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
25.4
25.9
C
C
12.9
16.1
B
B
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
39.4
>80
E
F
50.4
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
12.6
15.4
B
B
12.9
16.1
B
B
16
Monroe St./ 50`h Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
17.1
21.8
B
C
17.2
21.8
B
C
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0/11/0
0/11/0
0/11/0
0/11/0
8.4
11.3
A
B
8.8
12.4
A
B
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
0/JO
0/JO
Future Intersection
8.9
8.9
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
1/2/0
0/2/0
J0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
14.8
19.2
B
C
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
1*/2/0
Future lntersection
9.3
10.0
A
B
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
Future lntersection
8.6
9.2
A
A
22
Madison St/Project Access
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
Future lntersection
9.3
10.6
A
B
1. When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-27
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 1= Improvement
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way turn lane
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (HCMG), 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 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
EAP Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary:
Under EAP traffic conditions, five study intersections are anticipated to require installation of a traffic
signal (which are funded in the CIP) in order to maintain acceptable LOS under EAP "without project"
conditions. (#3 Madison Street/Avenue 54; #6 Jefferson Street/Avenue 54; #14 Monroe Street/Avenue
54 and #15 Monroe Street/Avenue 52.)
Under EAP "with project" conditions the previously described 5 intersections as well as one additional
intersection (#12 Monroe Street/Avenue 58) are anticipated to require installation of a traffic signal.
In addition, EAP analysis results indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at Avenue 52 (#7)
experiences deficient operations under cumulative "without project" conditions. Jefferson Street at
Avenue 52 requires reconstruction of the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes
around the center island. This effectively accommodates an additional through lane in the northbound
and southbound directions to provide acceptable LOS. The improvements are needed with or without
the project, so a fair share contribution is appropriate.
Table 4.13-18 provides the project's contribution to the needed signals.
Table 4.13-18 Project EAP Fair Share Contributions
Intersection
#
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (EAP)
3
Madison Street/Avenue 54
2%
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
1%
12
Monroe Street/Avenue 58
N/A
14
Monroe Street/Avenue 54
1%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
1%
7
Jefferson Street/Avenue 52
0.4%
All study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for EAP traffic
conditions, consistent with Existing traffic conditions.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-28 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Traffic Signal Warrants
Traffic Signal Warrants for existing traffic conditions indicate that, based on existing peak hour
intersection turning volumes, the following 4 unsignalized study area intersections currently warrant a
traffic signal beyond the 2 (#6 and #15) that satisfy signal warrants for Existing or E+P conditions.
• Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1)
• Madison Street at Main Access (#19)
• Monroe Street at Avenue 58 (#12)
• Monroe Street at Airport Boulevard (#13)
Project Phase 1 (2021)
Phase 1 Improvements
The traffic analysis was based on the following assumptions for on-site improvements, which must be
made conditions of approval for the project, in order to assure that impacts remain less than significant:
Avenue 58 will be constructed to its ultimate half - section width as a Secondary along the commercial
portion of the project.
Madison Street will be constructed to its ultimate half - section width as a Secondary along the
commercial portion of the project.
Avenue 60 will be constructed as a 2 - lane roadway along the project boundary.
For Project Access 1 & Avenue 58 (intersection 20), provide northbound cross - street stop control.
Construct south leg with one shared northbound left - right turn lane. Accommodate westbound left
turn lane within two - way left turn lane (TWLTL) striping.
Northbound cross - street stop control should be provided for Project Access 2 & Avenue 58
(intersection 21). Construct south leg with one right turn outbound lane. Left turns should not be
accommodated at this intersection.
For Madison Street & Project Access 3 (intersection 22), provide eastbound cross - street stop control.
Construct west leg with one right turn outbound lane. Left turns should not be accommodated at this
intersection.
Eastbound cross -street stop control should be provided for Madison Street & Main Access (intersection
19). Construct west leg with one left turn outbound and one right turn outbound lane. Construct a
northbound left turn inbound lane with a minimum turn bay length of 150'.
For South Access & Avenue 60 (intersection 18), provide southbound cross - street stop control.
Construct north leg with one shared left - right turn outbound lane. Construct west leg with one shared
left - through lane. Construct east leg with one shared through - right lane.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-29 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
As shown in Table 4.13-19 four study area intersections are anticipated to require installation of a traffic
signal (which are funded in the CIP) in order to maintain acceptable LOS with the construction of Phase
1.
Under EAPC conditions, as shown in Table 4.13-19, without the project 5 study area intersections will be
impacted. With the addition of Project Phase 1, the same intersections are impacted, without
improvements. Phase 1 of the project increases the trips at the affected intersections, but does not
worsen LOS levels at these intersections. As indicated in the table, project and CIP improvements will
result in acceptable LOS for all intersections.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-30 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Table 4.13-19 Intersection Analysis for Phase 1 (2021)
Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative (EAPC) Without and With Project
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control
(Note
3)
Intersection Approach Lanes
(Note 1)
Without Project
With Project
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
Delay
(Secs)
(Note 2)
Level of
Service
(Note 2)
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
10.9
14.2
B
B
11.4
15.6
B
C
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
8.8
10.2
A
B
8.9
10.2
A
B
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
21.3
47.6
C
E
22.6
53.0
C
F
-With Improvements
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
31.4
31.6
C
C
31.5
31.7
C
C
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
30.2
30.0
C
C
30.5
30.2
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
29.9
31.3
C
C
30.0
31.3
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
18.8
49.7
C
E
19.3
52.1
C
F
-With Improvements
TS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1>
36.1
29.9
D
D
36.2
40.3
C
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
RDB
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
42.8
78.7
E
F
44.3
>80
E
F
-With Improvements
RDB
0.5/1.5/1/»
0.5/1.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
10.2
12.8
B
B
10.3
13.0
B
B
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
9.3
34.4
A
C
9.4
34.3
B
B
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
52.4
50.6
D
D
52.5
50.7
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/1/1
8.8
10.6
A
B
8.9
10.8
A
B
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/1
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!/0
10.4
12.0
B
B
10.5
12.3
B
B
12
Monroe St/Avenue 58
AWS
0/1!/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!0
0/1!/0
10.8
23.8
B
C
11.0
14.1
B
B
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/1!/0
11.1
13.8
B
B
11.3
14.1
B
B
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/1!/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
31.1
35.7
D
E
33.0
35.9
D
E
-With Improvements
TS
0/1!/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
23.5
23.0
C
C
23.7
23.2
C
C
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/1!/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
50.3
>80
F
F
53.1
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/1!/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
13.0
14.7
B
B
13.0
14.7
B
B
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
16.3
20.4
B
C
16.3
20.4
B
C
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0/1!/0
0/1!/0
0/1!/0
0/1!/0
8.1
9.8
A
A
8.1
9.8
A
A
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
0/1/0
0/1./O
Future Intersection
8.6
8.6
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
1/2/0
0/2/0
/0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
11.2
12.6
B
B
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
1*/2/0
Future lntersection
9.9
10.6
A
B
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-31
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
Future Intersection
9.3
9.8
A
A
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
9.0
9.7
A
B
1.
When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient for right turning vehicles
to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = Defacto Right Turn Lane; 1 = Improvement
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way turn lane
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-32 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Phase 1 Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary
Four study area intersections are anticipated to require installation of a traffic signal (which are funded
in the CIP) in order to maintain acceptable LOS with the implementation of Phase 1.
• #3 Madison Street/Avenue 54.
• #6 Jefferson Street/Avenue 54.
• #14 Monroe Street/Avenue 54 and
• #15 Monroe Street/Avenue 52.
The impacted intersections are the same as those under EAP conditions, and require the same
improvements in order to operate at acceptable LOS.
As is the case under EAP conditions, analysis results indicate that the intersection of Jefferson Street at
Avenue 52 requires reconstruction of the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes
around the center island.
Table 4.13-20 provides the Project Phase 1 fair share contributions which are the same as EAP
contributions:
Table 4.13-20 Project Phase 1 Fair Share Contributions
Intersection #
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (Phase 1)
3
Madison Street/Avenue 54
2%
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
1%
12
Monroe Street/Avenue 58
N/A
14
Monroe Street/Avenue 54
1%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
1%
7
Jefferson Street/Avenue 52
0.4%
All study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for Phase 1 traffic
conditions, consistent with Existing traffic conditions.
Traffic Signal Warrants
Traffic Signal Warrants for existing traffic conditions indicate that, based on existing peak hour
intersection turning volumes, the following 3 unsignalized study area intersections currently warrant a
traffic signal that also satisfy Warrants for E+P conditions (#1, #12 and #13).
• Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1)
• Monroe Street at Avenue 58 (#12)
• Monroe Street at Airport Boulevard (#13)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-33 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Project Phase 2 (2023)
Phase 2 Improvements
For Project Phase 2 conditions, the same improvements are required as for Project Phase 1 (see previous
discussion).
In 2023, Table 4.13-21 indicates that without the project 6 study area intersections will require
improvements in order to operate at acceptable LOS levels. Phase 2 of the project increases the trips at
the affected intersections, but does not worsen LOS levels at these intersections. As indicated in the
table, project and CIP improvements will result in acceptable LOS for all intersections.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-34 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Table 4.13-21 Intersection Analysis for Phase 2 (2023)
Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative (EAPC) Without and With Project
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control'
Intersection Approach Lanes'
Without Project
With Project
Delay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service'
De ay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service'
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
11.4
15.9
B
C
12.0
18.2
B
C
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
9.0
10.4
A
B
9.2
10.4
A
B
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
33.9
>80
D
F
36.9
>80
E
F
-With Improvements
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
34.5
38.5
C
D
34.8
38.8
C
D
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
30.8
30.8
C
C
31.0
31.1
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
30.7
32.1
C
C
30.8
32.1
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
24.1
79.4
C
F
25.2
>80
D
F
-With lmprovements
TS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1>
42.7
41.6
D
D
43.0
42.3
C
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
RDB
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
59.8
>80
F
F
61.7
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
RDB
0.5/1.5/1/»
0.5/1.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
0.5/0.5/1/»
11.7
16.6
B
C
11.8
16.9
B
C
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
15.6
34.8
B
C
15.6
34.8
B
C
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
52.3
53.3
D
D
52.4
53.4
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/1/1
9.0
11.2
A
B
9.2
11.7
A
B
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/1
0.5/0.5/1
0/1!/0
13.0
18.0
B
C
13.3
19.1
B
C
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/110
0/1!/0
15.7
>80
C
F
16.4
>80
C
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/110
0/1!/0
17.3
21.7
B
C
18.1
22.9
B
C
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/1!/0
15.6
27.7
C
D
16.2
29.1
C
D
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
>80
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/1!/0
24.4
24.4
C
C
24.5
24.0
C
C
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
>80
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
13.9
15.5
B
B
13.9
15.5
B
B
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
16.6
21.5
B
C
16.6
21.5
B
C
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0/1!/0
0/11/0
0/1!/0
0/1!/0
8.5
11.3
A
B
8.1
9.8
A
A
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
0/J0
0/1/0
Future Intersection
8.6
8.6
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
1/2/0
0/2/0
1./0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
11.5
13.5
B
B
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
1*/2/0
Future Intersection
10.1
10.9
B
B
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
Future Intersection
9.3
9.9
A
A
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
9.1
9.9
A
A
1.
When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient for right turning vehicles to travel
outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = De facto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; 1=Improvement; 1 =Improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact
Analysis (May 2012); *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way left turn lane.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-35
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-36 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Phase 2 Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary
For Phase 2 traffic conditions, five study area intersections are anticipated to require installation of a
traffic signal (which are funded in the CIP) in order to maintain acceptable LOS.
• #3 Madison Street/Avenue 54
• #6 Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
• #12 Monroe Street/Avenue 58 and
• #14 Monroe Street/Avenue 54,
• #15 Monroe Street/Avenue 52.
This Phase results in impacts to one additional intersection not impacted in Phase 1 (#12).
As is the case under EAP conditions, the (#7) Jefferson Street/Avenue 52 intersection experiences
deficient operations under cumulative "without project" conditions. Jefferson Street at Avenue 52
requires reconstruction of the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes around the
center island.
Table 4.13-22 Project Phase 2 Fair Share Contributions
Intersection #
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (Phase 2)
3
Madison Street/Avenue 54
2%
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
1%
12
Monroe Street/Avenue 58
3%
14
Monroe Street/Avenue 54
1%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
1%
7
Jefferson Street/Avenue 52
0.4%
All study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for EAPC (2023) traffic
conditions, consistent with Existing traffic conditions.
Project Phase 3 (2026)
Project Phase 3 Improvements *
(*Project Phase 3 with Special Events is described in a separate section1
For Project Buildout (Phase 3) conditions, the following improvements are required, which must be
made conditions of approval for the project, in order to assure that impacts remain less than significant:
Avenue 58 will be constructed to its ultimate half - section width as a Secondary along the residential /
remaining portion of the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-37 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Madison Street will be constructed to its ultimate half - section width as a Secondary along the
residential / remaining portion of the project.
Construct traffic signal for the intersection of Madison Street & Main Access.
Under build out conditions, Table 4.13-23 indicates that without the project, 9 study area intersections
will be impacted. The addition of the project will result in a total of 10 impacted intersections under build
out (Phase 3) conditions. As indicated in the table, project and CIP improvements will result in acceptable
LOS for all intersections.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-38 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Table 4.13-23 Intersection Analysis for Phase 3 (2026)
Existing Plus Ambient Plus Cumulative (EAPC) Without and With Project
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control;
Intersection Approach Lanes'
Without Project
With Project
De ay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service2
Delay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service2
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
P
M
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
111/1
1/2/1
12.7
20.8
B
C
17.3
57.9
C
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
27.4
32.0
C
C
27.4
32.1
C
C
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
9.6
10.9
A
B
9.6
10.9
A
B
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
79.2
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
T5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
41.2
43.6
D
D
41.6
50.3
D
D
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
31.6
32.3
C
C
32.2
33.1
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
31.9
33.4
C
C
32.2
33.6
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
40.6
>80
F
F
54.2
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1>
22.7
22.5
C
C
22.9
22.6
C
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
RDB
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
>80
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
RDB
0.5/1.5/1»
0.5/1/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
15.1
28.3
C
D
16.8
34.3
C
D
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
19.4
35.4
B
D
19.5
35.8
B
C
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
-Without Improvements
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
52.4
58.8
D
E
53.0
60.3
D
E
-With lmprovements
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1V1
51.4
51.0
D
D
51.8
51.6
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/1/1
9.4
12.8
A
B
10.2
14.8
B
B
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
25.9
76.4
D
F
30.9
>80
D
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/1/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
33.3
34.9
C
C
34.4
37.7
C
D
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
0/11/0
52.2
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
111/0
111/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
23.2
33.3
C
C
25.9
38.1
C
D
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
47.3
>80
E
F
70.4
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
24.0
24.9
C
C
24.6
25.8
C
C
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/11/0
>80
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
34.7
37.0
C
D
35.0
37.7
C
D
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
>80
>80
F
F
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
33.7
41.2
C
D
34.1
44.1
C
D
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
17.7
25.0
B
C
17.9
25.8
B
C
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0[1!/0
0[1!/0
0[1!/0
0/1!/0
9.5
16.9
A
C
9.9
21.5
A
C
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
ONO
ONO
Future Intersection
8.9
8.9
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
112/0
0/2/0
1/0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
17.4
24.3
C
C
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
/2/0
Future lntersection
10.2
11.1
B
B
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-39
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
Future Intersection
9.4
10.0
A
B
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
Future Intersection
9.6
11.3
A
B
1.
When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient for right turning vehicles to travel
outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = De facto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; 1=Improvement; 1 =Improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact
Analysis (May 2012); *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way left turn lane.
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; 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.)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-40 June 2021
4.13 Transportation
Phase 3 Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary :
For Phase 3 traffic conditions, eight study area intersections are anticipated to require installation of a
traffic signal in order to maintain acceptable LOS.
• #1 Madison Street/Avenue 58
• #3 Madison Street/Avenue 54
• #6 Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
• #11 Monroe Street/Avenue 60
• #12 Monroe Street/Avenue 58
• #13 Monroe Street/Airport Boulevard
• #14 Monroe Street/Avenue 54
• #15 Monroe Street/Avenue 52.
This includes 3 intersections that were not needed for Phase 2 (#1, #11 and #13). Fair share contributions
for intersections that were included in Phase 2 are increased at Phase 3 due to additional traffic volumes
contributed by the project.
In addition, the Jefferson Street at Avenue 50 intersection (#9) requires a second westbound through
lane to maintain acceptable level of service. As with EAP conditions, the intersection of Jefferson Street
at Avenue 52 requires reconstruction of the current roundabout design to incorporate 2 circulating lanes
around the center island.
For the intersection of Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1), the addition of project traffic requires the
installation of a traffic signal. Therefore, the required signal will be installed by the project, and
reimbursement to the project developer may be provided for all but the project's fair share by future
developments, or CIP, or DIF credits.
For the remaining deficient study area intersections, the improvements are needed with or without the
project, so a fair share contribution is appropriate for these locations.
Table 4.13-24 Project Phase 3 Fair Share Contributions
Intersection #
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (Phase 3)
1
Madison Street/Avenue 58
23%
3
Madison Street/Avenue 54
9%
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
4%
7
Jefferson Street/Avenue 52
2%
9
Jefferson Street/Avenue 50
2%
11
Monroe Street/Avenue 60
6%
12
Monroe Street/Avenue 58
11%
13
Monroe Street/Airport Blvd
6%
14
Monroe Street/Avenue 54
5%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
4%
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-41 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
All study roadway segments analyzed are anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS for EAPC Phase 3
(2026) traffic conditions.
Special Events
The applicant anticipates the potential occurrence of multi -day special events at this location involving
attendance of not -to -exceed 2,500 guests per day. Events will be restricted to 4 days duration with peak
trips anticipated on Saturdays (up to 4 events per year). Staggered arrivals and departures will result in
fewer trips on the three other days. Therefore, Saturdays were selected to illustrate the worst-case
traffic scenario.
Improvement recommendations identified for weekend special event conditions are consistent with the
improvements identified for Phase 3 weekday typical operations. Therefore, any event occurring prior
to the build out of the project, and concurrent improvements, including traffic signal installations, would
result in a significant impact on traffic operations. If project special events are held prior to the
construction of Phase 3 improvements the following mitigation measures will be required to mitigate
impacts to less than significant levels (as provided in Mitigation Measures TRA -9 and TRA -10):
• Traffic improvements will be completed or the applicant shall provide a focused traffic analysis
with the Temporary Use Permit that identifies any improvements that are not necessary to
maintain acceptable levels of service at study intersections. If the analysis does not demonstrate
acceptable operations, the TUP will be denied.
• A special event traffic and parking plan will be submitted with each Temporary Use Permit to
ensure that special events will not cause any significant traffic or parking impacts. If the analysis
does not demonstrate acceptable operations, the TUP will be denied.
Weekend Traffic Volumes and Conditions
Weekend special event intersection LOS analysis is based on traffic volumes observed during the
weekend peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected on February 22, 2020. Discussions with
City staff resulted in the selection of the Saturday peak hour between 10:00 am and 2:00 pm.
The sample comparison of the PM weekday data and weekend counts focuses on 4 key intersections.
These intersections are identified in Table 4.13-25.
Table 4.13-25 Weekend Intersection Count Locations
ID
Intersection Location
ID
Intersection Location
1
Madison Street at Avenue 58
11
Madison Street at Avenue 58
5
Madison Street at Avenue 50
13
Monroe Street at Avenue 54
The average peak hour intersection change between weekday PM peak hour and weekend peak hour
count data at selected study area and nearby intersections is a decrease of approximately 17.20%. This
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-42 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
percentage reduction was applied to the other project area intersections for purposes of analysis of
special events.
The ITE Trip Generation Manual does not provide weekend trip generation rates for special events at a
wave pool facility since the use is very specific. Vehicle trips were calculated based on estimated number
of guests anticipated for these special events and a vehicle occupancy average of 2.4.
The Weekend Project Trip generation during a special event was based on 2,500 guests per day at the
Wave Pool facility and approximately 25% of the guests arriving or departing during the arrival and
departure peak hours. Weekend rates for other on-site land uses represent typical Saturday rates. As
shown in Table 4.13-26, the proposed project is anticipated to generate a net total of 8,932 trip -ends
per day on a Saturday during a special event with 906 vehicles per hour (VPH) during the arrival peak
hour and 844 VPH during the departure peak hour.
Table 4.13-26 Weekend Special Event Trip Generation
Trip Generation Results
Land Use
ITE LU
Code
Quantity2
Arrival
Peak Hour
Departure Peak Hour
Weekend
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family Detached
210
496 DU
248
213
461
248
213
461
4,732
Multi -Family Housing (Low -Rise)
220
(note 6)
104 DU
40
33
73
40
33
73
847
Internal to Retail/Resort
(29)
(52)
(81)
(65)
(36)
(101)
(777)
Residential External Trips
259
194
453
223
210
433
4,802
Shopping Center
820
60 TSF
140
130
270
140
130
270
2,767
Pass -By (26%)
(35)
(35)
(70)
(35)
(35)
(70)
(719)
Internal to Residential/Resort
(25)
(33)
(58)
(35)
(26)
(61)
(501)
Shopping Center External Trips
80
62
142
70
69
139
1,537
Resort Hotel
310
(note 5)
150 RM
60
48
108
60
48
108
1,229
Internal to Residential/Retail
(28)
(37)
(65)
(33)
(27)
(60)
(720)
Resort Hotel External Trips
40
20
60
36
29
65
799
Wave Basin Facility
(note 4)
2500
Guests
260
14
274
14
260
274
2,084
Internal to Residential/Retail/Resort
(42)
(4)
(46)
(4)
(46)
(50)
(480)
Wave Pool Facility External Trips
218
10
228
10
214
224
1,604
Wave Village
861
15 TSF
32
31
63
31
32
63
871
Internal to Residential/Resort
(14)
(15)
(29)
(15)
(14)
(29)
(348)
Wave Village External Trips
18
16
34
16
18
34
523
The Farm
495
16 TSF
9
8
17
8
9
17
146
Internal to Residential/Resort
(7)
(4)
(11)
(4)
(7)
(11)
(132)
The Farm External Trips
2
4
6
4
2
6
14
Project Subtotal
748
438
1,186
502
684
1,186
11,659
Internal Capture Subtotal
(105)
(105)
(210)
(116)
(116)
(232)
(2,008)
Pass -By (Shopping Center)
(35)
(35)
(70)
(35)
(35)
(70)
(719)
Project Total External Trips
608
298
906
351
533
884
8,932
1. Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (TE), Trip Generation Manual, 10`h Edition (2017).
2. DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; RM = Occupied Room
3. Source: Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition (2017)
4. Vehicle trips are calculated based on estimated number of guests during special events and vehicle occupancy of 2.4
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-43
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
5. Saturday data for Hotel (ITE Land Use 310) has been utilized
6. Since Saturday peak hour in/out ratio is not available for ITE Land Use 220, the in/out Saturday split for ITE LU 210 (Single Family Detached
Residential) has been utilized.
7. Hotel trip rates account for 23.5 tsf of ancillary facilities which include bar, restaurant, kitchen, rooftop bar, pool bar & grill, spa, and back of
house resort operations.
8. The Wave Basin Facility trip rates account for pool area and 1.5 tsf of back of house wave operations.
9. Wave Village trip rates account for 15 tsf of ancillary facilities which include shape studio, surf shop, board room, surf lounge/living room, surf
classroom, fitness pavilion, high performance center, & beach club.
10. The Farm trip rates account for 16 tsf of ancillary facilities which include Barn, Greenhouse, Equipment Barn, Tool Shed, Family Camp, Gym,
Outfitters, & Locker Rooms.
11. The 1 tsf back of house guardhouse use is accounted for in the Project rates.
The intersection analysis results indicate that the following study area intersections are anticipated to
operate at an unacceptable LOS Conditions:
Table 4.13-27 Intersection Analysis for EAPC Phase 3 (2026) Weekend Special Event Conditions
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control'
Intersection Approach Lanes'
Delay (Secs)2
Level of Service2
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/2/1
1/2/d
111/1
1/2/1
41.6
37.8
E
E
-With Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/1/1
1/2/1
29.9
30.9
C
C
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
10.5
10.8
B
B
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
45.9
39.3
E
E
-With Improvements
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/1
42.6
41.4
D
D
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/d
1/2/d
1/2/1
32.3
32.0
C
C
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1
32.5
32.5
C
C
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0.5/1/0.5
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/1/1>
21.9
21.8
C
C
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
RDB
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
RDB
0.5/1.5/1»
0.5/1/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
0.5/0.5/1»
13.5
13.4
B
B
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
29.0
28.9
C
C
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
-Without Improvements
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1/1/1
48.1
48.1
D
D
-With Improvements
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
1V1
47.3
47.3
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
AWS
0/0/0
1/0/1
0.5/0.5/0
0/1/1
12.7
13.9
B
B
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/1/0
1/1/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
47.0
45.2
E
E
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/1/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
35.3
35.4
D
D
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
0/11/0
0/11/0
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
30.2
30.4
C
C
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
-Without Improvements
AWS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
I 66.3
66.4
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/1
0/11/0
22.9
22.8
C
C
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
0.5/0.5/1
1/1/0
0/11/0
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
1/1/0
32.6
32.6
C
C
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
-Without Improvements
AWS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
>80
>80
F
F
-With Improvements
TS
0/11/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/2/d
34.3
34.3
C
C
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
20.7
20.7
C
C
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
AWS
0(11/0
0(11/0
0(11/0
0111/0
14.6
14.6
B
B
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
0V0
0V0
8.9
8.9
A
A
19
Madison St/Main Access
CSS
1/2/0
0/2/0
1./0/1
0/0/0
30.9
32.2
D
D
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/1/0
/2/0
12.6
12.1
B
B
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/1/0
0/2/0
9.9
10.3
A
B
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
11.0
11.1
B
B
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-44
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
4. When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient for right turning
vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = De facto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; 1=Improvement 1. =Improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element
Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012); *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way left turn lane.
5. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
6. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; RDB = Roundabout
7. 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.)
Table 4.13-28a. Impacted Intersections during Weekend Events
Impacted Intersections during Weekend Events
Madison Street at Avenue 58
Monroe Street at Airport Blvd
Madison Street at Avenue 54
Monroe Street at Avenue 54
Jefferson Street at Avenue 54
Monroe Street at Avenue 52
Monroe Street at Avenue 60
Jefferson Street at Avenue 52
Monroe Street at Avenue 58
The improvement recommendations for weekend events are consistent with the improvements for
Phase 3 project build out weekday typical operations. Mitigation Measures TRA -9 and TRA -10 will reduce
impacts of special events in the event Special Events are to take place prior to the construction of Phase
3.
A queuing analysis was performed for the Weekend Special Event conditions to assess the adequacy of
turn bay lengths to accommodate vehicle queues at the Project Entries.
Special events of up to 2,500 guests are anticipated to generate approximately 2,084 daily trips to and
from the wave pool facility alone, of which 1,604 are from outside the project residential, retail, and
resort hotel. During the arrival and departure peak hours, approximately 624 guests are anticipated to
arrive or depart per hour, with an average of 2.4 persons per vehicle.
Approximately 260 total inbound trips to the wave pool facility alone are anticipated during the arrival
peak hour (of which 214 are from outside the project residential, retail, and resort hotel,) with a similar
quantity occurring in the outbound direction during the departure peak hour.
A queuing analysis was performed for the With Project Special Event Conditions to assess the adequacy
of turn bay lengths to accommodate vehicle queues at the project entries. The results are found in Table
4.13-28b. Turn bays on surrounding streets are anticipated to accommodate the estimated 95th
Percentile queue length during Weekend Special Events.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-45 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-28b. Project Access Turn Lane Storage Lengths
For EAPC Phase 3 (2026) Weekend Special Event Conditions
ID
Intersection
Turning
Movement
Lane
EAPC (2026)
Weekend Special Event
Storage
Length
(ft)
95th Percentile
Queue Length
AM
PM
Peak Hour
Volume
Arrival
Departure
18
S. Access/Ave 60
SBL/SBR
52
56
PM
56
>300
44
53
19
Madison St/Main Access
NBL
110
53
AM
110
150
89
61
EBL
175
229
PM
229
150
107
137
EBR
15
27
PM
27
>150
41
42
20
Project Access 1/Ave 58
NBL/NBR
29
94
PM
94
>50
20
69
WBL
106
39
AM
106
>50
44
37
21
Project Access 2/Ave 58
NBR
18
51
PM
51
>50
52
44
22
Madison St/Project Access 3
EBR
34
78
PM
78
>50
43
42
Special event attendee vehicles are anticipated to access the wave pool facility via the Project Main Entry
and, to the extent warranted, through the back of house overflow parking area off of Avenue 60. Table
4.13-28b indicates that approximately 10% of special event vehicle trips for both the AM and PM Peak
Hours will be diverted to the Avenue 60 entrance. Exhibit 4.13-2 Project Residential and Resort External
Trip Distribution indicates that 10% of traffic is expected to occur on Madison Street south of the Project
Main Entry to Avenue 60. The Avenue 60 entrance is expected to account for 25% of vehicle trips for all
project scenarios, including Special Events. As provided in Mitigation Measure TRA -11, Traffic
Management Plans will be submitted to the City and the Police Department for review and approval
prior to special events. Timing for installation of traffic management measures will be scaled to the size
and duration of the event. In general, signage for large events should be in place five days prior and two
days following special events. The City and Police Department may impose additional measures if
determined to be necessary to meet the City's traffic management and public safety standards.
As provided in Mitigation Measures TRA -12 through TRA -14, for large special event venues, traffic
control typically includes special event flaggers, law enforcement personnel, online or transmitted event
information (suggested routes, parking, etc.,) and portable changeable message signs (CMS) (or
moveable mechanical electronic message boards.) CMS will be located at critical locations identified by
the La Quinta Police Department (LQPD) and in place 5 days ahead of the event and 2 days after.
Each special event will require a Temporary Use Permit (TUP). The TUP process may require additional
parking to be accommodated onsite based on the size of the event. The Back of House subarea (Planning
Area III -G) of the project (to the south) will be the primary location for event parking. This 26.5 -acre area
can accommodate approximately 3,460 passenger vehicles (approximately 132 vehicles/acre), if not
used for other purposes during a special event. An Event Parking Program will be provided with each
TUP when applications are submitted for City and Police Department Review when the nature of the
future event is known. Other event -specific traffic measures will be considered for each event, based on
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-46 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
the event's specific demands, to ensure compliance with the City's and Police Department's traffic
management and public safety standards. These measures included in Mitigation Measures TRA -12
through TRA -14 will be included in TUP conditions of approval for each occurrence.
With implementation of these mitigation measures, all project entries were determined to be adequate
for special event conditions, and the impacts associated with special events will be reduced to less than
significant levels.
Congestion Management Plan
The County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) requires a LOS E or better for regional roadways. As
noted previously and in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for this project, the generation, distribution,
and management of project traffic is not expected to conflict with the CMP; no CMP roadways occur in
the vicinity of the project. The project and background traffic will not exceed City level of service
standards or travel demand measures, or other standards established by the City or Riverside County
Transportation Commission (RCTC) for designated roads or highways.
The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) program identifies network backbone and local
roadways that are needed to accommodate growth.
The project will be required to pay TUMF fees in place at the time that building permits are sought. This
requirement will assure that the project impacts on the regional roadway system will be mitigated.
Following the payment of required fees such as TUMF and DIF, less than significant impacts are
anticipated relative to the CMP.
Alternative Transportation
As mentioned previously, the General Plan requires a Class II Golf/NEV path and multi -use path along
Avenue 58, Madison Street and Avenue 60. The multi -use path is located on the east side of Madison
Street and not adjacent to the project. Offsite improvements will include sidewalks along project
adjacent roadways. This will provide connectivity to the surrounding area as well as the proposed retail
located at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street.
The Desert Recreation District Master Plan includes a proposed trail along the toe of Coral Mountain
associated with the future Coral Mountain Interpretive Center. The proposed trail alignment falls within
the project boundaries. As shown in Mitigation Measure TRA -15 project plans will include
accommodations for this trail within the designated conservation area at the southwestern edge of the
property.
Interior to the project, Project Design Features (PDF) are incorporated that encourage the use of
alternative transportation measures including pedestrian and bicycle travel. The project will include
design elements such as sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrian crossings,
presence of street trees, and other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian - oriented
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-47 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
environments from auto -oriented environments. The project will 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 includes sidewalk connections, particularly to / from the retail areas
interacting with residential and resort uses on-site.
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to existing bike lanes. Temporary
impacts may occur during construction; however, any bicycle access adjacent to the project will be
restored to existing conditions.
The project design will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Less
than significant impacts are anticipated.
Special Event Traffic Management
Exhibit 4.13-4 shows a potential generalized schedule of special event operation planning.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-48 June 2021
N.T.S.
Perform Situation Analysis and
Risk Assessment
•
Conduct Public Outreach
Submit Permit
Application
•
Develop Transit Plan
•
Develop Travel Demand Management Initiatives
Establish Policies and Agreements
EVENT OPERATIONS PLANNING TIMELINE—.
N.T.S.
Meeting on
Event Concept
and Review Past
Lessons Learned
•
Develop
Traffic
Management
Plan
Approve
Mitigation
•
Issue Permit
Approval
•
Advance to
►( Implementation
Activities
Meeting on Meeting on
Traffic Management Traffic Management
Plan Requirements Plan Review
• •
Hearing with
Public to
Assess Needs ,,,
ro • ,o m
c o c
0 o v
M
Event
WEEKS DAYS mummi
( URBAN
CROSSROADS
MSA CONSULTING, INC.
>
PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.3209811 msaconsultinginc.com
SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL EVENT
OPERATION PLANNING
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.13-4
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Fair Share Contribution
In general, a project's fair share contribution can include a combination of fee payments to established
programs, construction of specific improvements with applicable fee credits or reimbursements,
payment of a fair share contribution toward future improvements, or a combination of these
approaches. Except to the extent provided otherwise below, the project's fair share contribution for the
required improvements specified above is satisfied through the project's payment of the City's
development impact fees. As set forth in the Development Impact Fee Study adopted by the City on
February 4, 2020, the traffic component of the City's DIF is calculated to ensure that future development
funds its fair share of necessary improvements to meet the City's General Plan transportation policies.
See, pp. 9-1 through 9-7 of Development Impact Fee Study, dated September 23, 2019, and attached as
Exhibit A to City Council Resolution No. 2020-003.
Table 4.13-29 illustrates the project fair share percentages. Table 4.13-29 illustrates the estimated
timing of offsite improvement and associated fair share contributions.
For the intersection of Madison Street at Avenue 58 (#1), addition of project traffic requires the
installation of the traffic signal. The required signal will be installed by the project.
For the remaining deficient study intersections, the improvements are needed under both with or
without project conditions. The project will be required to contribute to these CIP-programmed
improvements on a fair share basis, as shown in Table 1.13-29, through payment of the City's DIF.
With the installation of project and CIP-programmed improvements, impacts are expected to be less
than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-50 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-29
Project Fair Share Percentages
ID
Intersection
Project Only Traffic
EAPC Peak Hour Traffic
2040
With Project
Peak Hour
Traffic
Fair Share {%)
Phase 1
(2021)
Phase 2
{2023)
Phase 3
Buildout
12026)
Phase 1
{2021)
Phase 2
(2023)
Phase 3
{2026)
EAPC
Phase 1
(202111
EAPC
Phase 2
(2023?
EAPC
Phase 3
(2026]3
2040
With
Project.'
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
• AM Peak Hour
339
1,455
3,235
23%
10%
N/A
IVA
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
• PM Peak Hour
464
2,034
4,690
23%
10%
3
Madison St / Avenue 54
• AM Peak Hour
36
38
182
1,469
1,679
2,165
5,224
2%
2%
8%
3%
• PM Peak Hour
43
52
240
1,845
2,130
2,769
6,689
2%
2%
9%
4%
4
Madison St / Avenue 52
• AM Peak Hour
N/A
N/A
so
N/A
N/A
N/A
4,330
N/A
NJA
N/A
2%
• PM Peak Hour
129
5,452
2%
5
Madison St. / Avenue 50
• AM Peak Hour
1,967
4,587
1%
N/A
N/A58
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
• PM Peak Hour
72
2,594
6,410
146
6
Jefferson St. / Avenue 54
• AM Peak Hour
12
13
61
1,3.31
1,443
1,669
3,135
1%
1%
4%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
15
17
80
1,604
1,749
2,044
3,871
1%
1%
4%
2%
7
Jefferson St. / Avenue 52
• AM Peak Hour
12
12
76
2,792
2,965
3,301
5,035
0.4%
0.4%
2%
25S
• PM Peak Hour
15
13
97
3,233
3,462
3,900
6,097
0.4%
0.4%
2%
2%
9
Jefferson St / Avenue 54
• AM Peak Hour
N/A
N/A
77
3,213
3,344
3,622
4,954
N/A
N/A
2%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
96
3,853
4,054
4,440
6,161
2%
2%
10
Madison St. / Avenue 60
• AM Peak Hour
125
2,875
4%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
• PM Peak Hour
169
3,855
4%
11
Monroe St/ Avenue 60
• AM Peak Hour
82
685
941
1,334
3,094
6%
3%
`d:4
N/A
N/A
N/A
• PM Peak Hour
111
840
1,194
1,733
4,865
6%
2%
12
Monroe St/ Avenue 53
• AM Peak Hour
29
141
695
919
1,320
3,311
3%
11%
4%
• PM Peak Hour
V,A
37
185
1,007
1,334
1,914
4,733
N/A
3%
10%
4%
13
Monroe St / Airport Blvd_
• AM Peak Hour
76
640
854
1,218
3,200
6%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
N/A
N/A
97
864
1,163
1,654
4,442
N/A
N/A
646
245
14
Monroe St. / Avenue 54
• AM Peak Hour
12
12
76
1,120
1,349
1,738
3,987
1%
1%
4%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
15
13
97
1,250
1,566
2,108
5,384
1%
1%
5%
2%
15
Monroe St / Avenue 52
• AM Peak Hour
12
12
76
1,589
1,769
2,113
4,174
1%
1%
4%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
15
13
97
1,932
2,190
2,673
5,664
1%
1%
4%
2%
16
Monroe St. / 50th Avenue
• AM Peak Hour
9
9
58
1,561
1,734
2,067
4,319
1%
15-6
3%
1%
• PM Peak Hour
10
9
72
2,137
2,378
2,839
6,011
0%
0%
3%
1%
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
• AM Peak Hour
15
13
61
370
464
670
2,594
4%
3%
9%
2%
• PM Peak Hour
15
17
81
5.59
700
995
3,735
2%
2%
8%
2%
Project Fair Share 94 = ("Project Only Phase 1(20211 Traffic" / "EAPC Phase 1 (2021) Peak Hour Traffic")
Project Fair Share %= ("Project Only Phase 2 (20231 Traffic" / "EAPC Phase 2 (2023) Peak Hour Traffic")
Project Fair Share 9d = ("Project Only Phase 3 Buildout(20261 Traffic" / "EAPC Phase 3 (2026) Peak Hour Traffic")
° Project Fair Share %= ("Project Only Phase 3 Buildout(2026j Traffic" / "2040 Writ Project Peak Hour Traffic")
C.tUX#iatrst 22600-1300101,126151,Fxoe!{f22635-Reportx15x 1FairMare
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR 4.13-51
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.3, subdivision (b)
Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT):
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) procedures for determination of transportation impacts
have recently changed to an evaluation of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) rather than vehicle delay or LOS,
due to Senate Bill 743 (SB 743).
Methodology
The Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Policy (June 2020) (City Guidelines) is consistent with the VMT
analysis methodology recommended by OPR. As outlined in the La Quinta Guidelines, a Mixed -Use
project such as Coral Mountain, which includes both residential and non-residential uses is required to
analyze each type of uses independently, applying the following significance thresholds for each land
use component:
• 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.
• Retail Uses (Includes Hotels): a net increase in the total existing VMT for the region.
The La Quinta Guidelines identifies 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.
Table 4.13-30 summarizes the service population (population and employment) estimates for the
project. Employment estimates have been developed from land use and employment generation factors
from the Riverside County General Plan and modified for the specific project characteristics and then
confirmed with the Client. The Wave Basin and ancillary resort land uses are private, for use of residents
and resort hotel guests. Although the project employment is a mix of service and retail, the City of La
Quinta guidelines are explicit in requiring that the hotel land uses are categorized as retail uses for the
purposes of VMT analysis.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-52 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-30 Project Service Population
Land Use
_ Estimated Service Population
Residential
1,698 Residents
Hotel / Wave Basin
434 Employees
Commercial Retail
240 Employees
Hotel
300 Hotel Occupants
Total
2,672 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
socio-economic data (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 land uses, whereas hotel
occupants, Wave Basin visitors and retail patrons are evaluated separately using the boundary method
discussed below. Table 4.13-31 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.
Table 4.13-31 Baseline and Cumulative Project Residential Home -Based VMT
Category
Project 2012
Project 2040
Project 2020
(interpolated)
Residents
1,698
1,698
1,698
VMT
19,437
20,642
19,773
VMT / Resident
11.45
12.14
11.64
The project is estimated to generate 19,773 Home -Based VMT for baseline (2020) conditions. There are
an estimated 1,698 project residents. The result is approximately 11.64 home-based VMT / Capita for
the 2020 Baseline with project conditions. In addition, the cumulative (2040) project scenario results in
approximately 12.14 VMT / SP.
Citywide home-based VMT estimates were developed from the "with Project" RIVTAM model run for
baseline conditions for comparison purposes. Once total home-based VMT for the area is calculated,
total area VMT was then normalized by dividing by the population as shown on Table 4.13-32.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-53 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-32 Base Year 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 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 a level of 15 percent below the Citywide VMT per resident (15% below 12.98 is 11.03
VMT/ capita) represents a project impact. The project home-based VMT/ Capita of 11.64 is greater than
the City VMT / Capita threshold of 11.03, resulting in a potentially significant VMT impact.
Project Design Features for VMT Reduction
Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies were 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.
The project setting best reflects what CAPCOA refers to as a suburban place type because it is
characterized by dispersed, low-density, single -use automobile dependent land use patterns. 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.
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. These features are considered after the VMT data is extracted
from the traffic model.
Project VMT is reduced by the following project design features/attributes, which are enforceable by the
City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, and are anticipated to collectively reduce
project home-based VMT by approximately 6%.
• The placement of 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
commercial and resort land uses, a resident does not need to travel outside of the
neighborhood to meet his/her recreational and retail needs. The project's mixed-use
environment could provide for a potential reduction in project residential VMT of 3%
according to CAPCOA guidance.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft FIR
4.13-54 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
• The project includes improved design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity.
Recognized improved street network characteristics within the project include 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 provides 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
minimizes barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The project includes
sidewalk connections, particularly to / from the retail areas resulting in interaction with
residential and resort uses on-site. The project's implementation of this measure is
anticipated to result in a potential reduction in project residential VMT of 2% according
to CAPCOA guidance.
• The project will implement marketing strategies to optimize on-site resort and residential
uses. Information sharing and marketing are important components to successful trip
reduction strategies. Marketing strategies may include:
o Resident member benefits that include use of the resort amenities
o Event promotions
o Publications
The project's implementation of this measure could provide for a potential reduction in project
residential VMT of 1% according to CAPCOA guidance.
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 considered after the modeling process reduce
residential VMT from 11.64 VMT / resident to 10.94 VMT per resident, which is less than the City's VMT
residential threshold for a significant impact. The unique mixed-use characteristics of the project,
combined with walkability and connectivity design elements, optimize on-site interaction and result in a
lower VMT than standalone uses. Implementation of the previously stated project PDFs will reduce
potential impacts to below the City's established threshold for a significant VMT impact, and therefore,
the residential portion of the project would have a less than significant VMT impact. The project
Development Agreement will ensure that the mitigation measures and project design features identified
in the Draft EIR are enforceable by the City.
Project Employment Impact on VMT
The VMT analysis methodology for retail uses (including hotels) focuses on the net increase in the total
existing VMT for the region. The project consists of approximately 674 employees.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-55 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Travel activity associated with total link -level VMT was extracted from the "without Project" and "with
non-residential Project" RIVTAM model run for 2012 and 2040 conditions, then interpolated for baseline
(2020) conditions. This methodology is commonly referred to as "boundary method." As mentioned
previously, hotel occupants, Wave Basin visitors and retail patrons are evaluated in this regional
methodology. The "boundary method" VMT per service population for the CVAG subregion was utilized
to normalize VMT into a standard unit for comparison purposes, focusing on the total population and
employment in the Coachella Valley, as shown on Table 4.13-33.
Table 4.13-33 Base Year Sub -Regional Link -Level VMT
Category
Without Project Employment
With Project Employment
VMT Interacting with CVAG Area
15,173,739
15,166,580
CVAG Area Population
510,550
510,550
CVAG Area Employment
193,090
193,764
VMT / Service Population
21.56
21.53
Using the boundary method, CVAG area VMT with project employment is compared to without project
conditions to determine whether there is a significant impact. The CVAG subregion VMT / SP without
Project employment is estimated at 21.56, whereas with the Project employment, the CVAG subregion
VMT is estimated at 21.53. The project's effect on VMT (for non-residential uses) is not considered
significant because it results in a cumulative link -level boundary CVAG VMT per service population
decrease under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition.
Therefore, impacts associated with VMT can be considered less than significant.
c. Increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses
A queuing analysis was performed for the With Project Conditions to assess the adequacy of turn bay
lengths to accommodate vehicle queues at the project entries. Turn pocket lengths for project access
intersections with exclusive turn lanes were estimated based on the updated peak hour volumes
presented for the General Plan Buildout Year (2040) With Project conditions.
Simulation and optimization traffic modelling tools Syncro and SimTraffic were utilized to evaluate traffic
flows and identify potential queuing issues at the project entry intersections.
For each of the turn lanes evaluated, the maximum of the AM or PM peak hour 95th percentile queue is
anticipated to be less than the storage length provided. The TIA recommended turn bay lengths, which
are incorporated into project design, and are anticipated to provide adequate storage for the 95th
percentile queue.
The project will be developed in accordance with design guidelines included in the SP and will not create
a substantial increase in hazards due to a design feature. As provided in Mitigation Measures TRA -3 and
TRA -4, the project's access points will be located with adequate sight distances, which will be required
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-56 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
to meet City standards. The installation of site and Landscape improvements will be required to avoid
interfering with adequate sight distances. Project plans will be reviewed for any sight distance conflicts
and will require approval by the City.
As required in Mitigation Measures TRA -5 and TRA -7, the internal circulation system would provide
adequate fire department access. Final layout and site access design shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Traffic Engineer as well as the Fire Department to ensure compliance with their established
standards.
As provided in Mitigation Measure TRA -8, Traffic Control Plans will be required to be implemented
during construction activities. These plans will reduce potential impacts that may arise due to conflicts
with construction traffic, consistent with City standards.
The project is not anticipated to increase hazards due to geometric design feature or incompatible uses,
following implementation of the mitigation measures, as well as the review and approval process at the
City of La Quinta. Impacts will be less than significant.
d. Result in Inadequate Emergency Access
Regional access to the project site will be provided via primary arterials, secondary arterials and a variety
of local roads. The project proposes no changes to the City's roadway system. As mentioned previously,
primary Resort/Residential project access will be provided on Madison Street via the Main Access at
Intersection 19; emergency access for Resort/Residential project access will also be provided on Avenue
60 via the South Access. Primary commercial access will be provided at Project Access 1, 2 and 3.
All project access points onto public streets will be gated, as will be entrances to the residential portions
of the project in Planning Area 2. For gated projects, the Fire Department requires the installation of a
Knox -Box Rapid Entry System or similar device to facilitate emergency access by fire fighters and other
emergency first responders. Mitigation Measure TRA -6 addresses this requirement.
Prior to construction, both the Fire Department and Police Department will review the project site plan,
and individual sub -area plans as they are brought forward, to ensure safety measures are addressed,
including emergency access, consistent with Fire Department and Police Department standards. The
project is not anticipated to result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant relative to inadequate emergency access.
4.13.5 Cumulative Impacts
General Plan buildout (2040 Without Project Conditions)
Table 4.13-34 indicates that without the project as well as modified La Quinta General Plan Circulation
Element (GPCE) Update improvements, 3 study area intersections will be impacted. These intersections
are #1 Madison Street and Avenue 58, #11 Monroe Street and Avenue 60 and #12 Monroe Street and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-57 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Avenue 58 (this means following the implementation of improvements proposed in the GPCE, these 3
intersections remain impacted.)
Table 4.13-34 Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) without Project Conditions
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control;
Intersection Approach Lanes'
Delay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service2
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/ 1
1/2/1>
40.1
63.2
D
E
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
T5
1/2/1
1/2/d
1/J1
1/2/1>
35.1
45.5
C
D
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
23.2
28.6
C
C
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/1»
1/2/1>
42.9
49.0
D
D
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/d
1/2/1
38.8
52.0
D
D
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/A/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1>
36.7
53.2
D
D
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
TS
1/2/1
2/2/1
1/1/1
1/1/2>
24.0
43.5
C
D
7
Jefferson St./ Avenue 52
RDB
0.5/W1»
0.5/2.5/1»
0.5/2.5/1»
0.5/2.5/1»
5.8
8.3
A
A
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
5.8
8.3
A
A
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
1/2/1
2/2/1
41.5
52.8
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
TS
0/1!/0
2/1/1>
1/2/0
1/2/1
50.9
48.0
D
D
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
14/0
14/0
1/1/1
1/1/1>
45.1
98.8
D
F
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
TS
1/1/0
1/V1
1/V1>
1./1/1>
36.7
50.3
D
D
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
47.8
72.0
D
E
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
TS
2/2/1>
2/2/0
1/2/1
1/2/0
38.0
48.6
D
D
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
TS
1/1/0
1/2/d
1/1/0
1/2/1>
33.3
44.1
D
D
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
TS
1/2/1
1/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
38.0
48.6
C
D
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/V1
1/2/1
39.0
52.7
D
D
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
1/2/1
1/2/0
14/1
1/V1>
34.5
53.3
C
D
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
29.7
36.7
C
D
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
Intersection Does Not Exist
19
Madison St/Main Access
Intersection Does Not Exist
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
Intersection Does Not Exist
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
Intersection Does Not Exist
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
Intersection Does Not Exist
1 When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient for right turning
vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = De facto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; 1=Improvement,• 1 =Improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element
Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012); *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way left turn lane.
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6`h Edition (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.
Delay and level of service is calculated using Synchro 10.1 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; 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.)
2040 Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-58 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) conditions include the Travertine project currently under
consideration in the City of La Quinta that proposes to eliminate the connection of Madison Street as a
General Plan roadway south of Avenue 60. Therefore, the General Plan Buildout (Year 2040) conditions
analysis assumes elimination of this connection. Intersection lane recommendations described
previously provide acceptable LOS under Year 2040 traffic conditions.
Horizon year (2040) with Project Conditions
Table 4.13-35 shows the traffic conditions at General Plan buildout, with the addition of the proposed
project. The addition of the project results in the need for improvements at one additional intersection
when compared to "without project" conditions. The intersection is #19 Madison Street and Main
Access.
Table 4.13-35 Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year (2040) with Project Conditions
#
Intersection
Traffic
Control'
Intersection Approach Lanes'
Delay
(Secs)2
Level of
Service'
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
AM
PM
AM
PM
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
L/T/R
1
Madison St/Avenue 58
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/d
1L/1
1/2/1>
41.5
70.3
D
E
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/d
2/J1
1/2/1>
35.1
53.0
D
D
2
Madison St/Airport Blvd.
TS
1/2/d
1/2/0
0/0/0
1/0/1
23.7
29.7
C
C
3
Madison St./ Avenue 54
TS
2/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/1»
1/2/1>
44.2
53.3
D
D
4
Madison St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/d
1/2/1
39.5
53.3
D
D
5
Madison St./ Avenue 50
TS
2/1/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
1/2/1>
37.6
54.8
D
D
6
Jefferson St./ Avenue 54
TS
112/1
2/2/1
1/1/1
1/1/2>
24.2
48.4
C
D
7
Jefferson St./Avenue 52
RDB
0.5//2.5/1»
0.5/2.5/1»
0.5/2.5/1»
0.5/2.5/1»
5.9
9.1
A
A
8
Jefferson St./ Pomelo
TS
1/3/0
1/3/0
0.5/0.5/1
0.5/0.5/1
6.4
21.4
A
C
9
Jefferson St./ Avenue 50
TS
1/3/1
2/3/1
V2/1
2/2/1
42.2
54.6
D
D
10
Madison St./ Avenue 60
TS
0/1!/0
2/1/1>
2/2/0
1/2/1
49.6
53.1
D
D
11
Monroe St./Avenue 60
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
1/2/O
1/2/O
1/2/0
J1/1>
46.1
103.9
D
F
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
TS
1/2/0
1/V1
1/2/1>
1./2/1>
37.2
53.0
D
D
12
Monroe St./Avenue 58
-With GPCE Update
Improvements
TS
1/2/1
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
50.1
75.9
D
E
-With Modified GPCE
Improvements
TS
2/2/1>
2/2/0
1/2/1
1/2/0
39.5
52.0
D
D
13
Monroe St./Airport Blvd
TS
1/2/0
1/2/d
1/2/0
1/2/1>
33.3
44.1
D
D
14
Monroe St./ Avenue 54
TS
1/2/1
1/2/1
2/2/1
1/2/1
31.6
54.5
C
D
15
Monroe St./ Avenue 52
TS
2/2/1
2/2/0
1/2/1
1/2/1
39.0
54.3
D
D
16
Monroe St./ 50th Avenue
TS
2/2/1
2/2/0
1/V1
1/2/1>
34.1
54.5
C
D
17
Jackson St./ 58th Avenue
TS
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
1/2/0
29.7
38.0
C
D
18
S. Access/ Avenue 60
CSS
0/0/0
0/1!/0
04/0
0/1/0
34.2
34.8
D
D
19
Madison St/Main Access
12.7
15.6
B
C
-With Cross -Street Stop
Control
CSS
112/0
0/2/0
1./0/1
0/0/0
113.2
91.7
F
F
-With Traffic Signal
TS
1/2/0
0/2/0
V0/1
0/0/0
7.6
9.0
A
A
20
Project Access 1/Ave. 58
CSS
0/1!/0
0/0/0
0/2/0
1* 2/0
12.9
14.5
B
B
21
Project Access 2/Ave. 58
CSS
0/0/1
0/0/0
0/2/0
0/2/0
10.2
10.4
B
B
22
Madison St /Project Access 3
CSS
0/2/0
0/2/0
0/0/1
0/0/0
13.6
14.4
B
B
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-59
June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
1. When a right turn is designated the land can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient
for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right Turn Overlap Phasing; d = De facto Right Turn Lane;
1! = Shared Left/Thru/Right Lane; 0.5=Shared Lane; 1=Improvement; 1 =Improvement per City of La Quinta General Plan
Circulation Element Update Traffic Impact Analysis (May 2012); *=Left turn lane accommodated within two-way left turn lane.
2. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6t" Edition (HCMG), 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 software
BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS).
3. TS = Traffic Signal; AWS = All Way Stop; CSS = Controlled; 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.)
2040 Horizon Year With Project Conditions
The project will be responsible for the installation of the main access Traffic Signal at #19 Madison Street
and Main Access, improvements to adjacent roadways included in engineering plans and fair share
contributions to offsite improvements pursuant to the transportation component of the City's DIF.
Additionally, the project will participate in the Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program prior to
issuance of building permits.
Table 4.13-36 Roadway Segment Volume/Capacity Analysis
For General Plan Buildout (2040) With Project Conditions
Roadway
Segment
Roadway
Designation
Through
Travel Lanes
(note 1)
Capacity
(note 2)
ADT
(note 3)
Volume/
Capacity
Ratio
Avenue 58
West of Madison St.
Secondary
4
28,000
12,500
0.45
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 Airport Blvd
Primary
4
42,600
34,000
0.80
Avenue 60
West of Monroe Blvd
Secondary
4
28,000
24,000
0.86
Monroe St.
South of Airport Blvd
Primary
4
42,600
26,000
0.61
8. Existing Number of Through Lanes; 1= City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout number of lanes.
9. Source: City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 (Oct 2017)
10. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) expressed in vehicles per day.
2040 Traffic Volume Forecasts Summary
Table 4.13-37 illustrates the project's 2040 fair share contribution for 15 area roadway improvements.
These fair share percentages represent impacts based on 2040 project traffic volumes (GP buildout).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-60 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.13-37 Project 2040 Fair Share Contributions
Intersection #
Intersection
Fair Share
Contribution (2040)
1
Madison Street/Avenue 58
10%
3
Madison Street/Avenue 54
4%
4
Madison Street/Avenue 52
2%
5
Madison Street/Avenue 50
1%
6
Jefferson Street/Avenue 54
2%
7
Jefferson Street/Avenue 52
2%
9
Jefferson Street/Avenue 50
2%
10
Madison Street/Avenue 60
4%
11
Monroe Street/Avenue 60
2%
12
Monroe Street/Avenue 58
4%
13
Monroe Street/Airport Blvd
2%
14
Monroe Street/Avenue 54
2%
15
Monroe Street/Avenue 52
2%
16
Monroe Street/50th Avenue
1%
17
Jackson Street/58th Avenue
2%
As demonstrated above, build out of the project, in conjunction with General Plan (2040) build out
conditions will result in potential impacts, without improvements. However, with the implementation of
project and CIP-programmed improvements, cumulative transportation impacts will be reduced to less
than significant levels.
4.13.6 Mitigation Measures
TRA -1 The project proponent shall contribute DIF as required by the City of La Quinta.
TRA -2 The project proponent shall contribute TUMF traffic impact mitigation fees prior to the issuance
of Building Permits.
TRA -3 The project proponent shall ensure that streetscape improvement plans for the project frontage
on Avenue 58, Madison Street and Avenue 60, are submitted to the City for review and approval
prior to the initiation of landscape or roadway improvements.
TRA -4 The project proponent shall ensure that clear unobstructed sight distances are provided at all
site access points and internal intersections. Sight distances shall be reviewed and approved by
the City prior to approval of landscape and street improvement plans.
TRA -5 The project proponent shall ensure that final layout and site access design are subject to the
review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer prior to final project approval.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-61 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
TRA -6 The project proponent shall ensure that emergency police, fire and paramedic vehicle access
are provided for the project prior to final project approval.
TRA -7 The project proponent shall ensure that traffic signing and striping plans shall be developed in
conjunction with street improvement plans and submitted to the City of La Quinta for review
and approval during the project approval process
TRA -8 The project proponent shall ensure that Construction Traffic Control Plans are reviewed and
approved by the City prior to project construction. These plans are to be implemented during
construction activities. Construction includes onsite and offsite improvements.
TRA -9 If Special Events are to take place prior to the completion of Phase 3 construction, Phase 3 typical
operations traffic improvements will be completed or the applicant shall provide a focused traffic
analysis with the Temporary Use Permit that identifies any improvements that are not necessary
to maintain acceptable levels of service at study intersections. If the analysis does not
demonstrate acceptable operations, the TUP will be denied
TRA -10 If Special Events are to take place prior to the construction of Phase 3, a special event traffic and
parking plan will be submitted with each Temporary Use Permit to ensure that special events will
not cause any significant traffic or parking impacts. If the analysis does not demonstrate
acceptable operations, the TUP will be denied
TRA-11Traffic Management Plans will be submitted to the City and the Police Department for review
and approval prior to special events. Timing for installation of traffic management measures will
be scaled to the size and duration of the event. In general, signage for large events should be in
place five days prior and two days following special events. The City and Police Department may
impose additional measures if determined to be necessary. Individual management plans for
specific special events shall be submitted at least 30 days prior to the start of the event. The
special event Traffic Management Plans shall include the measures identified in Mitigation
Measures TRA -12 through TRA -14 below.
TRA -12 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan, the project proponent shall include
the use of Portable changeable message signs (CMS) or moveable mechanical electronic message
boards. CMS will be located at critical locations identified by the La Quinta Police Department
(LQPD) and in place 5 days ahead of the event and 2 days after.
TRA -13 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan the project proponent shall include the
use of law enforcement personnel and/or special event flaggers to direct traffic in locations
reviewed and approved by the City and Police Department.
TRA -14 In developing the Special Event Traffic Management Plan the project proponent shall include the
use of public service announcements (PSA) to provide information to event guests and
surrounding neighborhoods prior to the event. Examples include online event information,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-62 June 2021
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
brochures and changeable message signs that include details such as suggested routes, drop-off
and parking facility locations.
TRA -15 The project proponent shall ensure that the proposed Coral Mountain Interpretive Center trail
designated by the Desert Recreation District Master Plan and associated with the future Coral
Mountain Interpretive Center is incorporated into project plans. Accommodations for this trail
shall be located along the approximate toe of Coral Mountain, within the designated
conservation area at the southwestern edge of the property.
4.13.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With the implementation of the Mitigation Measures described above, and the imposition of conditions
of approval, impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels.
Implementation of the project will result in reduced Citywide VMT for service population and will not
increase VMT at the regional level.
4.13.8 Resources
1. Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by Urban Crossroads,
November 2020
2. Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.13-63 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources
4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources
4.14.1 Introduction
This section discusses the Tribal Cultural Resources that may be present in the project site and assess
potential impacts on these resources from future growth and development associated with the
implementation of the proposed project. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on
information contained in the Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report prepared by CRM Tech,
Inc. (October 2019, Revised May 2020), and the City of La Quinta General Plan Chapter 111 Natural
Resources Element, and the Native American Tribal Consultation undertaken by the City of La Quinta, as
required under Assembly Bill 52 (AB52) and Senate Bill 18 (SB18). This section discusses the cultural
resources that may be present in the project site or in the vicinity and assesses impacts on these
resources from the development associated with implementation of the project. The cultural resources
report is included in the Appendices of this Draft EIR (Appendix E, Cultural Report). Correspondence
regarding Tribal consultation under AB52 and SB18 is included in Appendix F. Please consult Chapter 9.0
for a glossary of terms and acronyms used in this Draft EIR.
4.14.2 Existing Conditions
Current Natural Setting
The City of La Quinta is situated in the Coachella Valley, a northwest -southeast trending desert valley
that constitutes the western end of the Colorado Desert. Dictated by this geographic setting, the climate
and environment of the region are typical of southern California's desert country, marked by extremes
in temperature and aridity. Temperatures in the region reach over 120 degrees in summer and dip to
freezing in winter. Average annual precipitation is less than five inches, and the average annual
evaporation rate exceeds three feet.
The project area is located at the southwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street, in the City of La
Quinta, is adjacent to the eastern foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and includes a portion of a rocky
knoll known as Coral Mountains. The surrounding land uses feature primarily existing residential
development associated with golf courses and vacant land to the north and the east; single family homes
and vacant land to the south; and vacant land to the west. Much of the land within the project
boundaries has been farmed in the past, with the exception of the northeastern corner, the
southernmost portion, and the far western edge near Coral Mountain.
A partially collapsed adobe house is located near the center of the project area, along with concrete pads
and footings left by demolished residential and agricultural buildings. Several unpaved roads traverse
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-1 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
through the project site. A large stockpile of soil sits in the southernmost portion, apparently removed
from a retention basin located to the south of the property, across an earthen levee.
The terrain in most of the project area is relatively level due to past agricultural operations. The ground
surface in much of the project area has been disturbed to various degrees, except for the portion in and
around Coral Mountain. Historical sources consulted yielded no evidence of any settlement or
development activities within the project area prior to the 1910s. Between 1855 and 1903, the only man-
made feature known to exist in the project vicinity was a road from "Indian Wells to Torres", which was
part of the historic Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail, which ran roughly 1,000 feet to the east of the project
site. By the 1930s and early 40s, the segment of the Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail near the site had been
abandoned in favor of a regular grid of new roads, including today's Avenue 58 and Madison Street. The
Trail had disappeared from the landscape as result of agricultural development in the vicinity during the
early 20th century.
The project area had been developed by the early 1900's into an agricultural enterprise know in the
1950s as the Coral Reef Ranch. Past studies suggest that the ranch was established by Hartman P. Travis,
a Los Angeles physician, and his associate Lawton Clary. In 1941, at least four buildings were present on
the landholdings of the ranch, all clustered on the north edge of the project area. This includes the
partially collapsed adobe house, which is a remnant of the ranch complex.
On the Coral Reef Ranch, some of the building present in 1941 had been removed by the 1950s. In 1953-
1954, another residence was built on the eastern edge of the project area. Located on the east side of
the original alignment of Madison Street. However, this residence was demolished in 2004, during the
realignment of Madison Street. Onsite farming operations continued into the late 20th century before
finally being abandoned by the 1990s. Since then, the entire project area has stood undeveloped to the
present time.
Ethnohistoric Context
The Coachella Valley is a historical center of Native American settlement, where U.S. surveyors noted
large numbers of Indian villages and rancherias occupied by the Cahuilla people in the mid -19th century.
The origin of the name "Cahuilla" is unclear, but it may have originated from their own word kawiya,
meaning master or boss. The Takic-speaking Cahuilla are generally divided by anthropologists into three
groups, according to their geographic setting: the Pass Cahuilla of the San Gorgonio Pass -Palm Springs
area, the Mountain Cahuilla of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the Cahuilla Valley, and
the Desert Cahuilla of the eastern Coachella Valley. The basic written sources on Cahuilla culture and
history include Kroeber (1925), Strong (1929), and Bean (1978), based on information provided by such
Cahuilla members as Juan Siva, Francisco Patencio, Katherine Siva Saubel, and Mariano Saubel. The
following ethnohistoric discussion is derived primarily from these sources.
The Cahuilla did not have a single name that referred to an all-inclusive tribal affiliation. Instead,
membership was in terms of lineages or clans. Each lineage or clan belonged to one of two main divisions
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-2 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
of the people, known as moieties, which were named for the Wildcat, or Tuktum, and the Coyote, or
Istam. Members of clans in one moiety had to marry into clans from the other moiety. Individual clans
had villages, or central places, and territories they called their own for purposes of hunting game and
gathering raw materials for food, medicine, ritual, or tool use. They interacted with other clans through
trade, intermarriage, and ceremonies.
Cahuilla subsistence was defined by the surrounding landscape and primarily based on the hunting and
gathering of wild and cultivated foods, exploiting nearly all of the resources available in a highly
developed seasonal mobility system. They were adapted to the arid conditions of the desert floor, the
lacustral cycles of Holocene Lake Cahuilla, and the environments of the nearby mountains. When the
lake was full or nearly full, the Cahuilla would take advantage of the resources presented by the body of
fresh water, building elaborate stone fish traps. Once the lake had desiccated, they relied on the
available terrestrial resources. Walk-in wells were dug by hand to utilize groundwater. The cooler
temperatures and resources available at higher elevations in the nearby mountains were also taken
advantage of.
The Cahuilla diet included seeds, roots, wild fruits and berries, acorns, wild onions, pinon nuts, and
mesquite and screw beans. Medicinal plants such as creosote, California sagebrush, yerba buena and
elderberry were typically cultivated near villages. Common game animals included deer, antelope, big
horn sheep, rabbits, wood rats and, when Holocene Lake Cahuilla was present, fish and waterfowl. The
Cahuilla hunted with throwing sticks, clubs, nets, traps, and snares, as well as bows and arrow. Common
tools included manos and metates, mortars and pestles, hammerstones, fire drills, awls, arrow -
straighteners, and stone knives and scrapers. These tools were made from locally sourced material as
well as materials procured through trade or travel. They also used wood, horn, and bone spoons and
stirrers; baskets for winnowing, leaching, grinding, transporting, parching, storing, and cooking; and
pottery vessels for carrying water, storage, cooking, and serving food and drink.
As the landscape defined their subsistence practices, the tending and cultivation practices of the Cahuilla
helped shape the landscape. Biological studies have recently found evidence that the fan palms found
in the Coachella Valley and throughout the southeastern California desert (Washingtonia filifera) may
not be relics of palms from a paleo-tropical environment, but instead a relatively recent addition brought
to the area and cultivated by native populations. Cahuilla oral tradition tells of a time before there were
palms in the area, and how the people, birds, and animals enjoyed the palm fruit once it had arrived.
The planting of palms by the Cahuilla is well-documented, as is their enhancement of palm stands
through the practice of controlled burning. Burning palm stands would increase fruit yield dramatically
by eliminating pests such as the palm borer beetle, date scales, and spider mites. Firing palm stands
prevented out -of -control wildfires by eliminating dead undergrowth before it accumulated to dangerous
levels. The Cahuilla also burned stands of chia to produce higher yields, and deergrass to yield straighter,
more abundant stalks for basketry.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-3 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Population data prior to European contact is almost impossible to obtain, but estimates range from 3,600
to as high as 10,000 persons covering a territory of over 2,400 square miles. During the 19th century,
the Cahuilla population was decimated as a result of European diseases, most notably smallpox, for
which the Native peoples had no immunity. Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage
are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian reservations in and near the Coachella Valley,
including Torres Martinez, Augustine, Cabazon, Agua Caliente, and Morongo. There has been a
resurgence of traditional ceremonies, and the language, songs, and stories are now being taught to the
younger generations.
Historic Context
In 1823-1825, Jose Romero, Jose Maria Estudillo, and Romualdo Pacheco became the first noted
European explorers to travel through the Coachella Valley when they led a series of expeditions in search
of a route to Yuma. Due to its harsh environment, few non -Indians ventured into the desert valley during
the Mexican and early American periods, except those who traveled along the established trails. The
most important of these trails was the Cocomaricopa Trail, an ancient Indian trading route that was
"discovered" in 1862 by William David Bradshaw and known after that as the Bradshaw Trail. In much
of the Coachella Valley, this historic wagon road traversed a similar course to that of present-day
Highway 111. During the 1860s -1870s, the Bradshaw Trail served as the main thoroughfare between
coastal southern California and the Colorado River, until the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad
in 1876-1877 brought an end to its heyday.
Non -Indian settlement in the Coachella Valley began in the 1870s with the establishment of railroad
stations along the Southern Pacific Railroad, and spread further in the 1880s after public land was
opened for claims under the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws. Farming
became the dominant economic activity in the valley thanks to the development of underground water
sources, often in the form of artesian wells. Around the turn of the century, the date palm was
introduced into the Coachella Valley, and by the late 1910s dates were the main agricultural crop and
the tree an iconic image celebrating the region as the "Arabia of America". Then, starting in the 1920s,
a new industry featuring equestrian camps, resorts, hotels, and eventually country clubs began to spread
throughout the Coachella Valley, transforming it into southern California's premier winter retreat.
In today's City of La Quinta, the earliest settlement and land development activities did not occur until
the turn of the century. In 1926, with the construction of the La Quinta Hotel, the development of La
Quinta took on the character of a winter resort, typical of the desert communities along Highway 111.
Beginning in the early 1930s, the subdivision of the La Quinta Cove area and the marketing of "weekend
homes" further emphasized this new direction of development. On May 1, 1982, La Quinta was
incorporated as the 19th city in Riverside County.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-4 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.14.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
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. 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.
State
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires lead agencies to determine if a project would have a significant effect on 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;
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-5 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
• 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.
If a lead agency determines that an archaeological site is a historical resource, then the resource under
CEQA must be protected. If a project may cause a substantial adverse change to the recourse and
avoidance is not feasible, the lead agency must identify potentially feasible measures to lessen the
impact to less than significant levels.
If an archaeological site does not meet the historical resource criteria contained in the State CEQA
Guidelines, and it is not deemed a unique archaeological resource in accordance with PRC § 21083.2 and
CEQA Guidelines § 1506.5, no further action would be required.
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
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-6 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
California Health and Safety Code
The California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001 is intended to provide a
seamless and consistent state policy to ensure that all California Indian human remains and cultural
items be treated with dignity and respect. The intent of the legislature shall also do the following:
• Apply the state's repatriation policy consistently with the provisions of the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.), which was enacted in 1990.
• Facilitate the implementation of the provisions of the federal Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Act with respect to publicly funded agencies and museums in California.
• Encourage voluntary disclosure and return of remains and cultural items by an agency or
museum.
• Provide a mechanism whereby lineal descendants and culturally affiliated California Indian tribes
that file repatriation claims for human remains and cultural items under the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001 et seq.) or under this chapter with
California state agencies and museums may request assistance from the commission in ensuring
that state agencies and museums are responding to those claims in a timely manner and in
facilitating the resolution of disputes regarding those claims.
• Provide a mechanism whereby California tribes that are not federally recognized may file claims
with agencies and museums for repatriation of human remains and cultural items.
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 day 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:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-7 June 2021
4.14 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 (PRC
Section 21082.3[a]).
Under AB 52, the CEQA Lead Agency is required to begin consultation with a California Native American
Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project. Tribal
consultation can be initiated once a project application is deemed complete. 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. 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-8 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
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 a party, in good faith and after reasonable effort,
concludes that a mutual agreement cannot be reached.
Regional and Local
The City of La Quinta General Plan
The City of La Quinta General Plan, 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.
4.14.4 Project Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
Upon development of the proposed project, Tribal Cultural Resources within or near the project site
could potentially be impacted. The thresholds analyzed in this section 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 15064.5 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 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-9 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Methodology Native American Participation
On July 2, 2019, CRM Tech submitted a written request to the State of California's Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission's Sacred Lands File. In the
meantime, CRM Tech notified the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians of the upcoming
archaeological fieldwork and invited tribal participation.
In response to CRM Tech's inquiry, the NAHC reported in a letter dated July 23, 2019, that the Sacred
Lands File identified no Native American cultural resources within the project area but recommended
that local Native American groups be contacted for further information. For that purpose, the NAHC
provided a list of potential contacts in the region. Upon receiving the NAHC's reply, on July 26 CRM TECH
sent written requests for comments to all 11 tribal organizations on the referral list. For some of the
tribes, the designated spokespersons on cultural resources issues were contacted in lieu of the
individuals on the referral list, as recommended in the past by the tribal government staff. The 11 tribal
representatives contacted are listed below:
• Patricia Garcia -Plotkin, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians;
• Amanda Vance, Chairperson, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians;
• Judy Stapp, Director of Cultural Affairs, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians;
• BobbyRay Esparza, Cultural Coordinator, Cahuilla Band of Indians;
• Shane Chapparosa, Chairperson, Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians;
• Travis Armstrong, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Morongo Band of Mission Indians;
• John Gomez, Jr., Cultural Resource Coordinator, Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians;
• Mercedes Estrada, Tribal Administrative Assistant, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians;
• Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians;
• Michael Mirelez, Cultural Resources Coordinator, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians;
• Anthony Madrigal, Jr., Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission
Indians.
Five Tribal representatives responded in writing. The Augustine Band of Mission Indians, Cabazon Band
of Mission Indians, Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians all stated that their tribes are unaware of any cultural
resources within the project area. The Cahuilla Band requested notification of future progress of the
project and the Augustine Band requested notification of any cultural resources recovered during the
project.
The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians requested copies of all cultural resource documentation and
Native American monitoring of all ground -disturbing activities. The Morongo Band of Cahuilla Indians
deferred to the Agua Caliente and stated they may provide comments to the City during the AB 52
consultations.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-10 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
City of La Quinta Tribal Consultation under 5818 and AB 52
The City of La Quinta initiated Tribal consultation, as required by SB 18 and AB 52. The Agua Caliente
Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI)_requested consultation. The meeting between the Tribe and the City
of La Quinta took place in February 2020. At the time, the Tribe indicated that the project had the
potential to significantly impact Tribal resources, including the sites that had been identified by the
project archaeologist. ACBCI, in a search of their databases and site records, identified a number of
important resources on and surrounding the project site, and indicated that they believed the area to
be an important resource area for Tribal history. ACBCI also indicated that the adobe structure on the
site, although not significant to Tribal history, was significant to the region's early farming tradition.
Project Impacts
a.i.-ii. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
Tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register
of Historical Resources, or in a local Register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resource Code Section 5020.1(k); or a significant tribal cultural resource
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1?
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.
The project archaeologist determined that only three sites constitute an archaeological and historical
resource (33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545). These three sites contain panels of rock art as well as
other associated artifacts and features. These sites are situated in proximity to one another along the
eastern base of Coral Mountain and have been termed the "Coral Mountain Rock Art Complex".
According to the project -specific Cultural Report, a previous study of the project area (conducted in
2003) stated that the images from the Rock Art Complex likely represent a style of rock art that was
produced within a very narrow span of time. The Coral Mountain Rock Art Complex, originally recorded
in 1973, was interpreted as "an old family or clan area", where house rings, fire pits, remains of a hand -
dug well, and a cremation area were also reported, along with a small scatter of pottery and lithic
artifacts. The two cremations observed in 1973 were apparently removed for reburial prior to 1980.
During consultation, the ACBCI indicated that the area is especially important, and the Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer (THPO) expects this area to be avoided and preserved. Therefore, Mitigation
Measure TCR -5 was established to assure that the sites are avoided and protected in situ during any
development activity through the establishment of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (in compliance with
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-11 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
the ACBCI); to provide long term protection of these sites, through prohibition of development, and the
recordation of protective easements, as well as a program of research and documentation of the sites.
For the balance of Site 33-001715, where scattered artifacts but no features were found, mitigative
surface collection and subsurface excavation is required in Mitigation Measure TCR -6 to recover a
representative sample of the cultural materials prior to the commencement of the project. With the
implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to sites 33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545 will
be reduced to less than significant levels.
The project archaeologist determined that the remaining five of the eight sites and all seven isolates
recorded within or partially within the current project area do not constitute a unique archaeological
resource or an historical resource. The sites include: 33-001716, 33-001717, 33-008386, 33-008388, and
33-028909. The isolates include: 33-009001, 33-009003, 33-028907, 33-028908, 33-028910, 33-028911,
and 33-028912. Sites 33-001716, 33-001717, 33-008386, and 33-028909 were classified as ceramic sherd
scatters. Site 33-001717 was described as a small sherd scatter with a possible cremation. When it was
revisited in 1987, no evidence of a cremation was found, and three sherds were collected at that time.
The site was again visited in 1998, at which time a total of 23 ceramic sherds, a quartz flake, and a piece
of purple glass were recorded. The one piece of sun -colored amethyst glass dated from the early 20th
century, giving the site a minor historic component. During the current survey, site 33-001717 was
revisited, and the only cultural remains observed within site boundaries were three ceramic sherds
located northwest of a dirt road. Site 33-001717 was previously determined not to be eligible for listing
in the California Register due to the low number of artifacts and the minimal archaeological data
potential. Similarly, 33-008386 was described as having "very little research potential," as were Sites 33-
001716 and 33-028909, where one single sherd and a scatter of six sherds, respectively, were found
during CRM Tech's analysis of the site. The information potential of these small, sparse ceramic scatters
has essentially been exhausted through their recordation, and the sites do not demonstrate any other
unique or remarkable qualities. Therefore, the archaeologist determined that none of these four sites
appears eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, and none of them qualifies
as a "historical resource" under CEQA Public Resource Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(j) and Title 14
California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(a). Isolates 33-009001, 33-009003, 33-028907, 33-
028908, and 33-028910 to 33-028912 consisted of either prehistoric ceramic sherds, or glass fragments
from the historic period. The project archaeologist opined that such isolates do not qualify as
archaeological sites due to the lack of contextual integrity, therefore, the sites are not considered
potential "historical resources" under CEQA. During Tribal consultation, however, the ACBCI disagreed.
Based on their resource inventories, and the breadth and significance of resources identified in and
surrounding the project site, the area is considered significant to the Tribe, and further surface
investigation, testing, and excavation, if necessary, of these sites and isolates to assure that impacts to
Tribal resources in the area are not significant. In order to assure that the impact is reduced to less than
significant levels, Mitigation Measure TCR -7 is provided below. TCR -7 requires a qualified archaeologist
to complete surface collection, testing and excavation if necessary, for the sites. A report of findings,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-12 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
including written confirmation of completion to ACBCI's satisfaction, shall be provided to the City prior
to ground disturbance.
As part of Tribal consultation, the Tribe requested and received all of the site records for the sites
identified in the project's cultural resources analysis. The Tribe also undertook analysis of its resource
files and database and reported that a number of areas surrounding the recorded sites had the potential
to yield additional resources, and that interconnection of multiple sites was likely. Based on the Tribe's
concerns, the Tribe developed mitigation measures that would reduce the project's potential impacts to
these interconnected sites to less than significant levels. These measures were included in the Tribe's
letter to the City, dated June 9, 2020, included as Appendix F. These mitigation measures are provided
below. Their relationship to the potential significant impacts associated with Tribal cultural resources
are described below:
Since the project is located within the ACBCI's Tribal Traditional Use Area and the Tribe's records indicate
that Tribal cultural resources are located within the project area, cultural monitoring, including an ACBCI
monitor, is required to address the Tribe's concern for the presence of Tribal cultural resources, as
described in Mitigation Measure TCR -1. In addition, TCR -2 and TCR -9 require monitoring on the site for
all earth moving activities (including vegetation removal, grubbing, grading and excavation) by both
archaeological and Tribal monitors. These monitoring activities will provide further protection of these
resources.
To protect the cultural resources that are significant to the Tribe, mitigation including the preservation,
additional recordation, and testing shall occur at specific sites identified in the project area. The project's
archaeologist will be required to prepare an Archaeological Treatment, Disposition, and Monitoring Plan
and a Rock Art Management Plan prior to ground disturbing activities. Both plans are to be submitted to
the ACBCI THPO for approval, and once approved provided to the City. This is indicated as Mitigation
Measures TCR -3 and TCR -4. Additionally, Mitigation Measures TCR -5 through TCR -8 will mitigate
potential disturbance of the sites by implementing the preservation and testing of the site areas.
California law requires the protection of historic—era and Native American human burials, cremations,
skeletal remains and items associated with Native American interments from vandalism and inadvertent
destruction. Mitigation Measure TCR -10 provides for this with the implementation of State law relating
to human remains. To further protect resources that may be uncovered during project development,
Mitigation Measures TCR -11 and TCR -12 will require a curation agreement with the ACBCI and
construction worker sensitivity training during all aspects and phases of project construction. Together,
these mitigation measures will assure that impacts to cultural resources unearthed during all phases of
project construction will be reduced to less than significant levels. With the implementation of
Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR -12, impacts to Tribal Resources will be reduced to less than
significant levels.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-13 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As described in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, most of the project area had been developed by the 20th
century into an agricultural business known in the 1950s as the Coral Reef Ranch. At least four buildings
were present on the landholdings of the ranch, all clustered on the northern edge of the project area.
The remains of the ranch complex, including the partially collapsed adobe house, have been recorded
into the California Historical Resources Inventory (Site 33-008388). As described in Section 4.4, the ranch
complex has historic significance, and is likely to include localities not yet identified. Mitigation Measures
CUL -1 and TCR -8 are provided below to protect this resource.
4.14.5 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts relating to tribal cultural resources are regional in nature, due to the wide range of
Native peoples in the Coachella Valley. Build out of the General Plan area, including lands of the proposed
project, has the potential to cumulatively impact tribal cultural resources. Development within the
project site will implement Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR -12 to assure that impacts to Trial
resources on the site are preserved and protected. 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.
4.14.6 Mitigation Measures
TCR -1: Before ground disturbing activities begin, the applicant shall contact the ACBCI Tribal Historic
Preservation Office to arrange cultural monitoring. The project requires the presence of an
approved Agua Caliente Native American Cultural Resource Monitor(s) during any ground
disturbing activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). Should buried cultural
deposits be encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt in the
vicinity of the deposits, and the Monitor shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the
Interior's Standards and Guidelines), within 24 hours, to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a
mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente
Tribal Historic Preservation Office.
TCR -2: The presence of a qualified archaeologist shall be required during all project related ground
disturbing activities, including clearing and grubbing. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and
approved by the ACBCI and provided to the City prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing
activity for all construction phases and activities. If potentially significant archaeological materials
are discovered, all work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until the
archaeologist can assess the significance of the find.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-14 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR -3: Before ground disturbing activities, the project's archaeologist shall prepare an Archaeological
Treatment, Disposition, and Monitoring Plan to be submitted to the ACBCI Tribal Historic
Preservation Office for approval. The Treatment, Disposition and Monitoring Plan shall be
deemed rejected by ACBCI's Tribal Historic Preservation Office if no action to approve the plan is
taken within 30 days from submission for approval. If the ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office
rejects two Treatment, Disposition and Monitoring Plans submitted for approval, the applicant
may appeal the second denial to the La Quinta City Council for a final determination. The
approved Treatment, Disposition and Monitoring Plan shall be provided to the City prior to any
ground disturbance on the site.
TCR -4: Before ground disturbing activities, the project's archaeologist shall prepare a Rock Art
Management Plan, based on recommendations made in the report by McCarthy and
Mouriquand, and shall submit the plan to the ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office for
approval. The Rock Art Management Plan shall be deemed rejected by ACBCI's Tribal Historic
Preservation Office if no action is taken to approve the plan within 30 days of submission for
approval. If the ACBCI Historic Preservation Office rejects two Rock Art Management Plans
submitted for approval, the applicant may appeal the second denial to the La Quinta City Council
for a final determination. The approved Rock Art Management Plan shall be provided to the City
prior to any ground disturbance on the site.
TCR -5: Sites 33-00193, 33-001715, and 33-009545, along the base of Coral Mountain and at the toe of
the slope, which contain the rock art panels and bedrock milling features, shall be avoided and
protected in situ during project construction through the establishment of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas; the Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be recorded on the property, and proof
of recordation shall be provided to the City prior to any ground disturbance in Planning Area III.
Nominations of these sites to the National Register of Historic Places shall be filed with the
appropriate federal agency prior to the issuance of the first grading permit; and the sites shall be
subject to the provisions of the Rock Art Management Plan.
TCR -6: For the portion of Site 33-001715 outside the preservation area established in TCR -5, mitigative
surface collection and subsurface excavation shall be completed prior to any ground disturbance
in Planning Area III to recover a representative sample of the cultural materials prior to the
commencement of the project and as a condition of grading permit issuance. The excavation shall
include a combination of standard archaeological units, shovel test pits, and backhoe trenches to
optimize both efficient coverage of the site area and safe recovery of cultural remains. The survey
protocols shall be approved by ACBCI. A report of findings, including written confirmation of
completion to ACBCI's satisfaction, shall be provided to the City prior to ground disturbance.
TCR -7: Prior to ground disturbance in Planning Area III, a qualified archaeologist shall complete surface
collection, testing and excavation if necessary, for sites 33-1716, 33-1717, 33-8386, 33-9001, 33-
9003, 33-28907, 33-28908, 33-28909, 33-28910, 33-28911, 33-28912. A report of findings,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-15 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
including written confirmation of completion to ACBCI's satisfaction, shall be provided to the City
prior to ground disturbance.
TCR -8: A comprehensive recordation program shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist for Site 33-
008388. The program shall contain detailed drawings and measurements to preserve the
information on the adobe building. Such information would include the floor plan, elevations,
building materials and their configurations, and any other notable structural and architectural
details. The adobe remains and an appropriate buffer determined by the project archaeologist
shall be flagged and cornered off during all ground disturbance and preserved in place. Prior to
the occupancy of any structure in Planning Area II, the adobe will be fenced off and an
informational plaque describing the history of the ranch complex shall be provided, and the
project proponent shall provide the City with the CC&Rs for the project area, demonstrating that
the feature would be maintained in perpetuity by the project's Homeowners Association. Special
attention should be given to the residence foundation, which, may be the remains of one of the
earlier structures at the site, dating from 1920s or before. The footings and slabs at this location
should be cleared and measured, and attempts should be made to locate the original trash pits
or privies which could contain valuable artifacts revealing much about life in the harsh
environment at such an early date. The scatter of artifacts has the greatest number of pre -1925
artifacts, mostly in the form of sun -colored glass, but also in brown and olive glass, porcelain,
ceramics and more. There may be remains of an early structure near this point, hidden amidst
the broad stand of tamarisk trees, an original windbreak. Search of these remains is required to
ensure the most complete recovery possible of the early 20' century artifacts and features.
Photos, measurements, and artifacts shall be catalogued, analyzed, reported, and curated at the
Coachella Valley Museum (Love et aI.1998:54).
TCR -9: The applicant shall coordinate with ACBCI Tribal Historic Preservation Office to ensure there are
a sufficient number of Native American monitors for the number of earth -moving machinery for
each phase of development. The applicant shall provide the City with fully executed monitoring
agreements prior to each phase of ground disturbing activity.
TCR -10: Should human remains be inadvertently discovered during ground disturbance, the provisions
of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5
shall be followed. 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
of the remains, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the
County Coroner has examined the remains. 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.
TCR -11: Prior to any ground disturbance, the applicant shall sign a curation agreement with the ACBCI
THPO. A fully executed copy of the agreement shall be provided to the City.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-16 June 2021
4.14 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR -12: Prior to any ground disturbance, cultural sensitivity training shall take place for all contractors
with the staff at the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO).
4.14.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measures TRC -1 through TRC -12 impacts to Tribal Cultural
Resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.
4.14.8 Resources
1. California Native American Heritage Commission http://nahc.ca.gov/ accessed July 2020.
2. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech,
October 2019, revised May 2021.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.14-17 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
4.15.1 Introduction
This section addresses the existing utilities and service systems for the proposed Coral Mountain Resort
project ("project"). This section also addresses the potential for the proposed project to impact the water
supply, wastewater demand, solid waste, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities of the
project site and surroundings, and identifies and analyzes environmental impacts of the project's
demand on these facilities. This section is based on the information contained in the Coral Mountain
Resort Specific Plan, Coral Mountain Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification
(WSA/WSV) (Appendix M), the Coral Mountain Master Plan Hydrology Report (Appendix J.3), the Coral
Mountain Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix J.1), 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), the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and Southern California Gas Company
(SoCalGas). 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 terms and acronyms used in this
Draft EIR.
4.15.2 Existing Conditions
Proposed Project
The site is currently included in the previously approved specific plan Andalusia at Coral Mountain. The
Specific Plan consists of approximately 929 acres located south of Avenue 58, west of Monroe Street,
north of Avenue 60, and both east and west of Madison Street. Andalusia East (the area east of Madison
Street) is currently under development, providing low density residential units, an 18 -hole golf course, a
clubhouse and associated amenities. Under the Specific Plan, lands on the west side of Madison Street
are proposed to result in neighborhood commercial, residential and golf course uses; however, this area
is currently undeveloped.
The proposed project includes a Specific Plan Amendment to remove the 386 -acre area west of Madison
Street, which is proposed to be covered under a new Specific Plan (the "Coral Mountain Resort Specific
Plan", SP 2019-0003). The project also proposes a General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, a Tentative
Tract Map, Development Agreement and Site Development Permit leading to the development of a mix
of uses including residential, resort, commercial, and recreational uses on the vacant land west of
Madison Street. The Specific Plan would allow 496 low density residential units on approximately 232.3
acres, a full-service resort hotel (up to 150 keys), 104 resort residential units, a 16.62 -acre artificial Wave
basin, and 57,000 square feet of resort commercial uses on approximately 120.8 acres, 60,000 square
feet of neighborhood commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and open space recreational uses on 23.6 acres.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-1 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Existing Conditions
Currently, the 386 -acre project site is vacant and undeveloped with desert vegetation of varying heights
and densities. The site has been subject to previous agricultural and associated residential land uses, dirt
roads and hiking trails. A historic period adobe house and remnant foundations for other farm buildings
are located near the center of the project area. The site has been cleared and graded of agricultural
vegetation.
The local area is characterized as a developing area with a number of golf course and residential
communities to the north, west, east, and southeast; the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south;
and single family residential, open space and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) percolation
ponds to the south.
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.
The Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin has been the principal source of water for the Valley since the
early 1900s. This basin has an estimated storage capacity of 40 million acre-feet (AF) of water within the
upper 1,000 feet and is divided into four subbbasins: 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. CVWD works with other local water agencies and Coachella Valley
stakeholders to implement water conservation, water reuse, and a groundwater recharge strategy to
ensure water availability and system capacity to meet the growing needs of the Coachella Valley.
The CVWD service area encompasses approximately 640,000 acres, mostly within Riverside County, but
also extends into northern Imperial and San Diego Counties; however, CVWD provides no urban water
services to San Diego County.
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.
CVWD currently has approximately 109,714 domestic water connections and provided approximately
87,959 AF of water in 2018. CVWD serves all of Rancho Mirage, Thousand Palms, Palm Desert, Indian
Wells, La Quinta, and a portion of Indio and Coachella.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-2 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
CVWD operates more than 100 wells and serves a population of 283,000 in its service area. CVWD's 2012
adopted Water Management Plan and 2015 Urban Water Management Plan have been developed to
assist the agency in reliably meeting current and future water demands in a cost-effective manner.
Stormwater System
The project is located in the Whitewater River Watershed, which is an arid desert region encompassing
approximately 1,645 square miles. 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. However, the Whitewater River Region includes the Coachella Valley surface drainage up to, but
not including, the Salton Sea, which is managed in a separate watershed. In relation to the project site,
CVSC is located approximately 7.5 miles to the east at its closest point.
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. Broad flood control management
responsibilities, which include planning, maintenance, and construction of improvements for these and
other regional stormwater facilies is manageged by CVWD. Local drainage facilities are managed by the
City and designed to collect and convey runoff from local streets and properties to the regional
stormwater facilities noted above. Storm drain facilities can be public or private. Examples of public
facilies 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 a homeowner's association. The project is located on the east side of Coral
Mountain and two engineered flood control dikes (Dike No. 2 and Dike No. 4). The off-site dikes form
part of the regional flood control system operated by CVWD to retain alluvial fan drainage descending
from the eastern slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The dikes have established a physical separation
between off-site mountain drainage and the rest of the valley floor. Due to the location of these dikes,
the project site is designated within Zone X by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), panels 06065C2244H, 06065C2900H, and 06065C2925H. Zone X
designations are defined as an "area with reduced flood risk due to levee" and "area of minimal flood
hazard".
The terrain at the project site is currently characterized as level with scattered vegetation covergage
resulting from past site clearing and agricultural operations. On the eastern project boundary (west of
Madison Street) there are two existing earthen basins designed to accept stormwater runoff from an
eastern part of the site and from off-site street runoff, attributed to a portion of Madison Street. Aside
from these earthen basins, the project site is absent of any private or public formal stormwater facilities,
or any naturally occurring drainage courses, such as those associated with rivers, streams, or washes.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-3 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
See Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EIR for an in-depth discussion of existing
flood control conditions, both locally and at the project site.
Wastewater Service System
Wastewater that has been highly treated and disinfected can be reused for landscape irrigation and
other purposes; however, treated wastewater is not suitable for direct potable use. Recycled
wastewater has historically been used for irrigation of golf courses and municipal landscaping in the
Coachella Valley since the 1960s.
CVWD provides the City with sanitary sewer collection and treatment. Most of the City and Sphere of
Influence (SO1) are served by sewer, although some septic systems are still in use, particularly in the SO1
area. CVWD operates six water reclamation plants (WRPs), two of which (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 5.0 million gallons per day
(mgd). For all land in the City and Sphere located south of Miles Avenue, including the project site,
sewage is treated at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located southeast of the City,
which has a capacity to treat 9.9 mgd. WRP-4 became operational in 1986 and serves 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.
Currently, the project is not served by wastewater systems due to its undeveloped condition.
Solid Waste
Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (RCDWR) is responsible for the landfilling of non-
hazardous county waste. In this effort the Department operates five landfills, has a contract agreement
for waste disposal with an additional private landfill and administers several transfer station leases. The
RCDWR Planning Section ensures that the County's planned and proposed waste management activities
and projects are in compliance with applicable federal, state and local land use and environmental laws,
regulations, and ordinances.
Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of La Quinta are provided by Burrtec. This service
provider offers its customers a wide range of services for residential and commercial businesses,
construction -related activities and special events. Solid waste and recycling collected from the proposed
project will 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:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-4 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
• The 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, 2020, and a total remaining capacity of approximately 8.7 million tons. The
current landfill remaining disposal capacity is estimated to last, at a minimum, until
approximately 2029. Between January 2019 to December 2019, the Lamb Canyon Landfill
accepted a daily average of 1,925 tons with a period total of approximately 591,125 tons. Landfill
expansion potential exists at the Lamb Canyon Landfill site.
• The 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, 2020, the landfill had a total remaining disposal capacity of approximately 5.1
million tons. The current landfill remaining disposal capacity is estimated to last, at a minimum,
until approximately 2022. Between January 2019 to December 2019, the Badlands Landfill
accepted a daily average of 2,878 tons with a period total of approximately 886,388 tons. Landfill
expansion potential exists at the Badlands Landfill site.
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. 110 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.
The project site is not currently served by electricity, due to its vacant and undeveloped condition.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-5 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Natural Gas
Natural gas is provided to the City of La Quinta, and 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.
Existing 4 -inch underground natural gas lines are located along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, north
and east of the project site, respectively. Currently, natural gas is not provided to the site.
Telecommunications
As telephone service has become less regulated 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 property is not currently served by telecommunication facilities, but the project is located
within the service areas of Frontier and Charter Communications.
4.15,3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was established in 1972 as the basic structure for regulating discharges of
pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. Under
the CWA, the Environmental Protection Agency (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.
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 -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-6 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
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).
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.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
This law was enacted in 1976 and is the principal federal law governing the disposal of solid waste and
hazardous waste. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (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
California Water Code
Requirements for the preparation of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) are set forth in Senate Bill 610
(SB 610), which was enacted in 2001 and became effective January 1, 2002. SB 610 amended Section
21151.9 of the Public Resources Code. It requires cities and counties and other CEQA 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.
The Water Code requires a WSA be prepared for any project that consists of one or more of the following:
• A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-7 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
• A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or
having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space
• A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than
250,000 square feet of floor space
• A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms
• A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house
more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000
square feet of floor area
• A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified above
• A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of
water required by a 500 -dwelling unit project
• For public water systems with fewer than 5,000 service connections, a project that meets the
following criteria: any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial
development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the
public water system's existing service connections, or a mixed-use project that would demand an
amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential
development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public
water system's existing service connections.
California Water Boards
The California Water Board consists of the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. Together they work to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality. The
State Water Board sets statewide water quality standards, issues statewide general permits, conducts
statewide surface and groundwater monitoring and assessment, and issues orders for cleaning up
contaminated sites. The State and Regional Water Boards also work with federal, state, and local
agencies, as well as other environmental agencies to ensure a coordinated approach to protecting
human health and the environment.
There are nine regional water quality control boards statewide. The nine Regional Boards are semi-
autonomous and are comprised of seven part-time Board members appointed by the Governor and
confirmed by the Senate. Regional boundaries are based on watersheds and water quality requirements
are based on the unique differences in climate, topography, geology, and hydrology for each watershed.
Each Regional Board makes critical water quality decisions for its region, including setting standards,
issuing waste discharge requirements, determining compliance with those requirements, and taking
appropriate enforcement actions. The project site is located in the Colorado River Basin Region (Region
7).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-8 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Urban Water Management Plan
In 1983, the Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) was established by Assembly Bill 797,
and passage of this law recognized that water is a limited resource and that efficient water use and
conservation would be actively pursued throughout the State of California. The 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.
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
CalRecycle is the term the State of California uses for its Department of Resources Recycling and
Recovery, formerly known as the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). This state
agency performs a variety of regulatory functions pursuant to California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title
27 and other regulations. 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 (see CCR
Section 20050, for example). It is also the lead agency for implementing the State of California municipal
solid waste program deemed adequate by the U.S. EPA for compliance with RCRA (Riv. County EIR No.
521).
California Integrated Waste Management Act (IWMA) (Assembly Bill (AB) 939)
This act 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. With its passage, solid waste management practices were redefined
to require California cities and counties to divert disposal of solid waste by 50% by the 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 (Riv. County EIR No. 521).
Mandatory Diversion and Recycling, AB 341
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-9 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
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 wastes going to landfills
and thus extend their usable lives. AB 341 requires cities and counties, including 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." (Riv. County
EIR No. 521).
California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings
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. The standards are updated
periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and
methods. In December 2019, the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2019 Building and
Energy Efficiency Standards effective January 1, 2020. This code requires new homes to include at least
50 percent of kitchen lighting to be LED, compact fluorescent or similar high efficiency fixtures, double
pane windows, cool roofs, and other design techniques to reduce heat loss.
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. The 2019 CALGreen standards became effective on January
1, 2020. Part 11 establishes design and development methods that include environmentally responsible
site selection, building design, building siting and development to protect, restore and enhance the
environmental quality of the site and respect the integrity of adjacent properties.
Regional and Local
Coachella Valley Water Management Plan 2010 Update
CVWD initiated the first water management planning process in the early 1990s to address the overdraft
conditions in the groundwater basin and to ensure that there would be adequate water supplies in the
future. The plan is a 35 -year blueprint for wise water management and the basis for all of CVWD's efforts
to preserve the Coachella Valley's groundwater source.
The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (CVWMP) was adopted by the CVWD Board in September
2002. The goal of the CVWMP is to reliably meet current and future water demands in a cost effective
and sustainable manner. The CVWD Board recognized the need to update the CVWMP periodically to
respond to changing external and internal conditions. The 2010 CVWMP Update defines how the goal
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-10 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
will be met given changing conditions and new uncertainties regarding water supplies, water demands,
and evolving federal and state regulations.
CVWD Urban Water Management Plan
CVWD prepared the 2005 CVWD Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and submitted the UWMP to
DWR on December 13, 2005. It was approved on March 3, 2011. The most recent plan is the 2015 CVWD
UWMP, which was prepared and adopted by the CVWD Board of Directors on June 14, 2016. CVWD
submitted the 2015 CVWD UWMP to DWR on July 1, 2016, and it was approved on September 29, 2016.
The CVWD UWMP analyzes the potential sources of water supply and 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
UWMP by the identification of feasible and cost-effective opportunities to meet existing and future
demands. CVWD explores the enhancements to supplies from traditional sources, such as groundwater,
and sources including water exchanges, water recycling, utilizing Colorado River water from the
Coachella Canal, desalination, and water banking/conjunctive use. The CVWD UWMP also analyzed
water supply during normal year, single -dry year, and multiple -dry year conditions to ensure supply
would appropriately meet regional demand.
CVWD Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 1302.4
CVWD Landscape Ordinance 1302.4 requires 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.
CVWD Maximum Applied Water Allowance
CVWD established a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) for areas within their service
boundary. For design purposes, the MAWA is the upper limit of annual applied water for the established
landacpae area. It is based upon the areas reference evapotranspiration (ET) adjustment factor, and the
size of the landscaped area. The estimated applied water use for the landscaping and other outdoor
water use provided at any project shall not exceed the MAWA.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-11 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Sanitary Sewer Management Plan
The Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP) describes the management of CVWD's sewer collection
system and minimizes the number of sanitary sewer overflows. The SSMP is required by the State Water
Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for
Sanitary Sewer Systems (WDR 2006-0003) enacted May 2, 2006. The SSMP provides guidance for a
properly managed, operated and maintained sanitary sewer system. All portions of CVWD's wastewater
collection system are required to be managed, operated and maintained to provide adequate capacity
to convey the peak wastewater flows, to minimize the frequency of Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs),
mitigate the impacts that are associated with any SSO that may occur, and meet all applicable regulatory
notifications and reporting requirements.
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan
The Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP) was prepared in accordance with the
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, Chapter 1095 (AB 939), and is updated every five
years. The CIWMP outlines and codifies the goals, policies and programs that the County of Riverside
and its cities are implementing to create an integrated and cost-effective waste management system
that complies with the provisions of AB 939 and its diversion mandates. The CIWMP's components
include the Countywide Summary Plan, the Countywide Siting Element, the Source Reduction and
Recycling Element, the Household Hazardous Waste Element and Non -Disposal Facility Element. Each of
these Elements address plans for Riverside County and each of its cities. The Riverside Countywide
Integrated Waste Management Plan was approved by the California Integrated Waste Management
Board in September of 1996 and has subsequently been updated at five-year intervals as required by
law (Riv. County EIR No. 521).
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Chapter 8.13 Water Efficient Landscaping
The purpose of Chapter 8.13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code is to establish effective water efficient
landscape requirements for newly installed and rehabilitated landscapes. It is also the purpose of this
chapter to implement 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. It is the intent of the City to promote water
conservation through climate appropriate plant material and efficient irrigation as well as to create a
city landscape theme through enhancing and improving the physical and natural environment.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-12 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
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 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (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 municipal separate storm drains;
control of the discharge to municipal separate storm drains from spills, dumping or disposal of materials
other than stormwater; and reduction of 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 one hundred years, also referred to as the controlling 100 -year
storm event. The design of such facilities is subject to approval by the City engineer.
City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm
Drain Systems)
The requirements for 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 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 (WQMP) to be implemented in accordance with the
Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit.
4.15.4 Project Impact Analysis
Thresholds of Significance
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?
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-13 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
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
The potential for project -specific and cumulative impacts associated with utilities and related service
systems, was assessed based upon available data that considers the project, the project site, and related
projects. Impacts on water demand, wastewater, solid waste, energy, and telecommunication facilities
that would result from the project were identified by determining the future demand associated with
project implementation. A quantitative comparison was used to determine impacts of the project on
future demands.
The project -specific Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV), Master Plan
Hydrology Report, and a Preliminary Hydrology Report were consulted to determine water use, and
proposed stormwater facilities. A brief summary of the reports are provided below.
Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification
The WSA/WSV was is intended to document the sufficiency of the local water supply to meet the demand
of development that could occur under the proposed project. The public water supplier for the project
will be CVWD, the domestic water supply (potable) for the project will be the Indio Subbasin in the
Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin via CVWD's potable water distribution system. The WSA/WSV
examines the current condition of the Indio Subbasin of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin and
finds the water supply from the Indio Subbasin, the State Water Project (SWP), the Colorado River, and
other sources adequate to supply the project in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910
et seq. The WSV verifies the ability of the water supplies from the Indio Subbasin, the SWP, the Colorado
River, and other sources to serve the project in accordance with the California Government Code Section
(GCS) 66473.7.
The 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 211, and SB 1262. The WSA/WSV also includes identification of existing
water supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, or agreements relevant to the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-14 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
identified water supply for the project and quantities of water received in prior years pursuant to those
entitlements, rights, contracts, and agreements.
Master Plan and Preliminary Hydrology Report
The project -specific Master Plan Hydrology Report and Preliminary Hydrology Report was prepared in
January 2021, and May 2020 (respectively) by MSA Consulting, Inc. The purpose of the Coral Mountain
Resort Mater Plan and Preliminary Hydrology Reports are to provide basin analyses for the subject
property. The drainage requirements for this project fall under the jurisdiction of the City of La Quinta.
Storm flows are conveyed through the site via street flow to localized low points. All proposed pad
elevations are set a minimum of 1 -foot above the high -side street elevation. Both reports concluded that
the proposed retention basins are sufficiently sized to contain the flood volume from the controlling
100 -year storm.
Analysis and findings of the project -specific WSA/WSV, Master Plan Hydrology Report, and Preliminary
Hydrology Report 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
Water Supply
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water service to the City of La Quinta,
and is the largest provider of potable water in the Coachella Valley. CVWD would supply water to the
project site. Pursuant to an existing agreement with CVWD, the project will develop two onsite wells
sites, one of which will be equipped with a well pumping plant as required by CVWD to serve the project.
The project will also drill a private well to provide an additional source of water for non-domestic
(outdoor) purposes. The exact location of the wells and well sites will be subject to CVWD approval.
As discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, a project -specific Water Supply
Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) was approved by CVWD in March 2020. Additionally,
a revised WSA/WSV Water Demand Revision was approved on September 29, 2020. According to the
WSA/WSV Revision, the project would require approximately 958.63 acre-feet per year (AFY), or 2.49
acre-feet per acre. The residential indoor demand estimate is 97.22 AFY, the non-residential indoor use
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-15 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
estimate is 59.94 AFY, and the outdoor estimate is 801.47 AFY. See discussion b) below for further
discussion of water supply.
The following water conservation measures are standard requirements of the City/CVWD landscape
ordinance requirements and applicable State requirements, and will be implemented at the project site
in order to assure the most efficient use of water resources and to meet and maintain the 2010 CVWMP
Update goals throughout the life to the project:
1. Native plant materials and other drought tolerant plants shall be used in all non -turf areas of
project landscaping. Large expanses of lawn and other water -intensive landscaped areas shall be
kept to the minimum necessary and consistent with the functional and aesthetic needs of the
project, while providing soil stability to resist erosion.
2. In the event recycled water becomes available to the project, the potential use of tertiary treated
water will be reviewed to determine feasibility of its use for on-site landscaped areas to reduce
the use of groundwater for irrigation.
3. The installation and maintenance of efficient on-site irrigation systems will minimize runoff and
evaporation and maximize effective watering of plant roots. Drip irrigation and moisture
detectors will be used to the greatest extent practicable to increase irrigation efficiency.
4. The use of low -flush toilets and water -conserving showerheads and faucets shall be required in
conformance with Section 17921.3 of the Health and Safety Code, Title 20, California Code of
Regulations Section 1601(b), and applicable sections of Title 24 of the State Code.
5. Project developers will pay any required CVWD groundwater replenishment fees for the purpose
of buying additional supplies of water for importation into the basin.
Per the WSA, the project demand of 958.63 AFY, accounts for approximately 0.49 percent of the total
projected growth in water demand presented in the 2015 UWMP for 2040. The project will conform to
the requirements of CVWD's programs and requirements pertaining to water management and
conservation. Therefore, it was concluded in the WSA/WSV that CVWD has sufficient facilities to serve
the proposed project.
Water Infrastructure
The project proposes to connect to the existing water lines located north of the project site on Avenue
58, to the east on Madison Street, and to the southeast on Avenue 60. Specifically, an 18 -inch water
main is located along Avenue 58; 30 -inch and 24 -inch water mains occur along Madison Street; and a
24 -inch water main occurs along Avenue 60. The proposed project water lines will consist of 18 -inch, 12 -
inch, and 8 -inch public water lines. Two points of connection will occur at Aveune 58. The project will
connect 12 -inch lines at the northern boundary to the existing 18 -inch water main. Four points of
connection will occur on Madison Street. The project will connect an 18 -inch water main to the existing
30 -inch water main at Madison Street's northern -most point of connection. This water line will decrease
in diameter from 18 inches to 12 inches to serve the residential and resort portions of the site. Two
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-16 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
additional points of connection will occur at the eastern -most property boundary. At this location, the
project will connect two 12 -inch water mains to the existing 30 -inch water main. The southern -most
Madison Street point of connection will connect a proposed 18 -inch water main to the existing 24 -inch
water main. 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. Proposed connections and domestic
water infrastructure are illustrated in Exhibit 4.15-1, Conceptual Water Domestic Water Plan. Non -
potable water sources are intended to be used for the irrigation of common landscape areas. Non -
potable water will be available from private well water as well as from irrigation canal water. The project
will require two well sites and one well pumping plants to adequately serve the site and CVWD service
area, which will be conveyed to CVWD. The well will be connected to the system and used by CVWD for
domestic water. In addition, the project will drill one private well to provide irrigation and other outdoor
water for the project.
No new off-site water facilities are required as a result of project development. The well sites and
domestic well are required per CVWD ordinance and the existing agreement with CVWD to serve the
region and the project, consistent with CVWD's adopted District Master Plan. Accordingly, the operation
of the off-site water facilities are discussed in further detail in CVWD's District Master Plan.
Wastewater
Wastewater Capacity
CVWD provides the City with sanitary sewer collection and treatment. For all land in the City and Sphere
located south of Miles Avenue, including the project site, sewage is treated at the Mid -Valley Water
Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located southeast of the City, which has a capacity to treat 9.9 MGD. The
average annual flow to this facility is approximately 4.75 MGD. The proposed project is estimated to
generate wastewater at 156,839 gallons per day (GPD) or 0.157 MGD, which is one percent of the plant's
capacity, and a 3.3 percent increase of the existing annual flow. No new wastewater treatment facilities
are required as a result of the proposed development.
Infrastructure
Eight -inch sewer lines currently exist adjacent to the project site along Avenue 58 (north of the project),
and along a portion of Avenue 60 (southeast of the project). Fifteen -inch sewer mains in the project
vicinity are located within the existing Andalusia Country Club (east of the project), and at the Avenue
58 and Madison Street intersection (northeast of the project). The project proposes 15 -inch, 12 -inch and
8 -inch sewer lines throughout the project site. A 15 -inch proposed sewer main will connect to the
existing 15 -inch sewer main at the Avenue 58 and Madison Street intersection. A 12 -inch sewer main
will connect to an existing sewer main located at the northwest corner of the existing Andalusia Country
Club community, east of the project site. This sewer main connection will travel north along Seville (an
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-17 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
existing internal roadway in Andalusia), and cross Madison Street to the project site. The sewer lines will
provide sewer service to the project without the need for additional off-site infrastructure. See
discussion c.) of the Utilities and Service Systems section for further discussion.
Storm Water Drainage
Local drainage facilities are those designed to collect and convey runoff from local streets and properties
to the regional stormwater facilities, such as the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC), the La
Quinta Evacuation Channel, the Bear Creek System, the East La Quinta Channel, and Lake Cahuilla. These
local drainage facilities are managed by the City of La Quinta. Within the City, there are also privately
owned facilities, such as those occurring within privately managed residential developments designed
to address on-site stormwater runoff. As a standard requirement, the project site design will incorporate
stormwater management by conveying 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. This is discussed below.
The project -specific Master Plan Hydrology Report (Appendix J.3) and Preliminary Hydrology Report
(Appendix J.2) was prepared by MSA Consulting, Inc. to evaluate the existing hydrologic factors, such as
topography, drainage, soils, and rainfall characteristics relevant to the project site and tributary areas.
The project -specific Hydrology Reports divided the proposed site plan into multiple engineered drainage
areas generally consistent with the project's planning areas to facilitate the implementation of final
engineering design and sizing of stormwater facilities (inlets, pipes, outlets, and retention basins)
according to the phases of development. Table 4.15-1 below summarizes the drainage area calculations
and corresponding retention volumes accounted for in the Master Plan Hydrology Report. It provides
the drainage area identification, corresponding area calculation, expected impervious ground cover
resulting from development, the required retention capacity to handle the controlling 100 -year storm
event runoff volume, and the retention volume capacity provided by the basin design. For each on-site
drainage area, the project provides sufficient retention capacity to meet the local requirements for
properly retaining the 100 -year storm event.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-18 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4.15-1 Summary of Drainage Areas and Retention Capacities
Drainage Area
Identification
Area
Calculation
Impervious
Condition and
Percentage of
Drainage Area
Required Stormwater
Retention Capacity to
Manage the Controlling
100 -Year Storm Event
Runoff Volume
Retention Volume
Capacity Provided by
Basin Design
A
162.745 Acres
39.291 Acres (24%)
803,730 Cubic Feet
3,178,217 Cubic Feet
72.96 Acre -Feet
B
41.586 Acres
17.518 Acres (42%)
182,917 Cubic Feet
292,016 Cubic Feet
6.70 Acre -Feet
C & F
55.002 Acres
17.771 Acres (32%)
219,690 Cubic Feet
223,118 Cubic Feet
5.12 Acre -Feet
D
28.403 Acres
14.157 Acres (50%)
134,950 Cubic Feet
168,719 Cubic Feet
3.87 Acre -Feet
E
61.802 Acres
19.059 Acres (31%)
246,363 Cubic Feet
1,216,389 Cubic Feet
27.92 Acre -Feet
G
35.742 Acres
10.635 Acres (30%)
141,025 Cubic Feet
147,099 Cubic Feet
3.38 Acre -Feet
H
7.118 Acres
6.406 Acres (90%)
56,379 Cubic Feet
60,238 Cubic Feet
1.38 Acre -Feet
51.629 Acres
15.164 Acres (29%)
202,969 Cubic Feet
237,233 Cubic Feet
5.45 Acre -Feet
Off Site Portion
of Madison
Street (North)
11.704 Acres
(Off Site)
5.754 Acres (49%)
59,063 Cubic Feet
126,903 Cubic Feet
2.91 Acre Feet
Off -Site Portion
of Madison
Street (South)
5.701 Acres
(Off -Site)
4.014 Acres (70%)
40,668 Cubic Feet
217,630 Cubic Feet
5.00 Acre -Feet
Based on the project -specific Master Plan and Preliminary Hydrology Reports, the hydrologic area
associated with the proposed development includes on-site and off-site tributary conditions, which, as
a standard requirement, must be managed to satisfy the City's hydrologic requirements. Storm flows will
be conveyed through the site via street flow to localized low points. All proposed pad elevations are set
a minimum of 1 -foot above the high -side street elevation. To achieve the City's hydrologic requirements,
the project will include multiple retention facilities integrated with the storm drain design, such that all
sub -drainage areas of the project are adequately covered. The proposed storm drain system will include
the properly sized conveyance systems and meet the City's design criteria of retention facilities. The
offsite and onsite tribuaties, proposed conveyance systems, and proposed retention facilities are
discussed below.
The project will manage off-site tributary areas entering the project, including off-site street runoff from
a portion of Avenue 58 and Madison Street to the north and east, respectively, and an off-site portion
of hillside west of the project. The storm flows from the off-site street drainage areas are captured by
existing catch basins on Madison Street and discharged into existing basins onsite (west of Madison
Street). These basins are sized to contain the flood volume from the controlling 100 -year storm. The off -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-19 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
site hillside tributary area consists of rock out -cropping and open brush conditions immediately west of
the site. This off-site drainage area will not be modified by the project. According to the Master Plan
Hydrology Report, Drainage Area A occupies the southwest portion of the project site and consists
primarily of Dike No. 2, Coral Mountain, a portion of Dike No. 4, and the south-westerly portion of
Planning Area IV and Planning Area III. Drainage Area A consists of three drainage subareas, indicated as
Al, A2 and A3. Storm runoff (approximately 18.4 acre-feet) from this drainage area is proposed to be
directed to the Wave Basin facility which, when fully operational, provides over 73 acre-feet ofretention
in freeboard. Shallow retention basins will be constructed on the west portion of the project property
(on-site) to accept the naturally occurring flows produced by precipitation events (10 -year storm) in
drainage areas Al and A3. Together with the proposed retention basins, the Wave Basin retention will
accept the flows produced by 100 -year storm events, which is compliant with La Quinta Municipal Code
(LQMC) 13.24.120 (Drainage), and La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-16 (Hydrology and Hydraulic
Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems).
For the on-site conditions, stormwater runoff will be conveyed along engineered flow lines (pipes,
surface swales, curb and gutter) to the proposed onsite retention facilities. Retention facilities will
include surface retention basins, underground retention facilities, the Wave Basin retention, and lake
systems for storage. The drainage designs for the SDP and TTM are based on the preliminary hydrology
report submitted for the TTM (TTM 2019-0005). As indicated in Table 4.15-1, the project is separated
into nine ionsite drainage areas (DA), indicated as A through I. Drainage Area A occupies the westerly
portion of the project, and includes PA IV lands, as well as portions of PA III proposed for subdivision in
the TTM and development approval in SDP 2021-0001. DA -A2 encompasses the southern half of the
resort residential units and a portion of the hotel area, will drain towards the Wave Basin via
surface/pipes. Drainage Area B covers the single family lots on the northwest portion of the TTM, which
includes a lake feature at its center. Runoff within this drainage are, estimated 4.2 acre-feet, will be
conveyed to the proposed lake feature. Drainage Area C, which encompasses the northwestern portion
of the resort residential area, generates an estimated 1 acre-foot of storm flows that will be conveyed
via a system of catch basins and pipes and controlled surface flows and retained in a retention basin
located in a proposed lake feature in Drainage Area F. Drainage Area D includes the majority of the hotel
site, and the eastern portion of the resort residential area shown n the TTM. This runoff, estaimated at
3.1 acre-feet, will be conveyed, via a system of catch basins and piples and controlled surfaces, to and
retained in the proposed lake located in Drainage Area F. Drainage Areas E through I, which are located
in PA I and II and proposed currently only for large lot subdivisions, will be subdivided at a later date,
and will be required to provide hydrology studies. The design of these drainage systems will be required
to comply with the City's requirements, including the retention of the 100 -year storm, based on the
designs of each of these subsequent maps. See Exhibit 4.9-1, Master Hydrology Drainage Area Exhibit,
in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, for locations of drainage areas. Table 4.15-1 outlines the
drainage areas (A through I, and offsite), corresponding area calculation, expected impervious ground
cover resulting from development, the required retention capacity to handle the controlling 100 -year
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-20 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
storm event runoff volume, and the retention volume capacity provided by the basin design. For each
onsite drainage area, the project provides sufficient retention capacity to meet the local requirements
for properly retaining the 100 -year storm event. The proposed stormwater management concept would
introduce on-site retention facilities sized sufficiently to accept, contain and infiltrate the stormwater
volume resulting from the controlling 100 -year storm event, as mandated by LQMC 13.12.120, and
outlined in the La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-16.
Electric Power
The site is within the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) service area for electric service. IID has indicated
that additional offsite improvements will be required to meet the project's power demand. The project
will be required to install twelve, 6 -inch conduits along Avenue 58 to bring additional power to the site
and install a transformer bank at IID's existing substation yard located at Avenue 58 and Monroe Street.
The offsite improvements for the conduit system will take place in the existing right of way, on both sides
of Avenue 58, between Andalusia and PGA West, and on Madison Street, west of Andalusia. Avenue 58
is an improved road and classified as a secondary arterial. These improvements would occur along the
existing right-of-way and will be installed underground during Phase I of the development. The purpose
of the extension is to provide electricity to the project only. The extension is not intended to provide
electric power to the areas surrounding the project. The facility will be designed and constructed to the
design standards of IID. The proposed offsite improvements (i.e., transformer bank and conduit system)
must be approved by IID to ensure the design standards are met.
As determined in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, of this Draft EIR, the project is expected to consume
approximately 57,987.3 kiloWatt hours (kWh) of electricity during construction of the site, and
approximately 8,642,729 kWh of electricity annually during operation of the project. 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 annual electrical consumption of 8,642,729 kWh (which is
equivalent to 8,642.73 MWh), the project would account for approximately 0.19 percent of IID's total
estimated demand in 2031.
IID's 2020 Service Area Plan states that IID must ensure the reliability, safety and security regulations
promulgated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and enforced by the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). In order to maintain reliable energy services to meet future
demand, IID outlines 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 in order to maintain an adequate
energy supply to IID customers. IID has joined California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) in
partnership with Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power
Authority (SCPPA) to collaborate on the development of individual utility energy efficiency and demand -
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-21 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
reduction targets. IID implements an aggressive energy -efficiency portfolio with the goal of reducing
both energy consumption and peak demand. Energy -efficiency programs may be classified as either
conservation programs, or demand-side management (DSM) programs. Conservation programs attempt
to reduce the total amount of energy required by consumers while DSM programs attempt to change
the timing of energy use. Additionally, IID implements energy conservation measures in the service area.
The project will be required to comply with regional and local conservation measures to ensure project -
related energy consumption is not significant.
In a will serve letter dated May 26, 2020, IID indicated that it can extend electrical facilities to serve the
site. Therefore, with the project's connection to the IID substation, it is anticipated that IID's existing and
planned electricity capacity and electricity supplies would be sufficient to support the project's demand.
In addition, energy codes established by the state will be implemented by the project site as an effort to
reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency at the project site.
Natural Gas
Underground natural gas lines exist adjacent to the project site along Avenue 58 and Madison Street,
north and east of the project, respectively. The existing underground natural gas facilities are located at
the northern side of Avenue 58, and consist of a 4 -inch line. A 4 -inch natural gas line also travels along
Madison Street to approximately 425 feet south of the Madison Street and Avenue 58 intersection. At
this location, the gas line enters the Andalusia Country Club property, east of the project site, and
terminates at the southwestern corner of the Andalusia property.
The project will connect to the existing SoCalGas facilities. Construction impacts associated with the
installation of natural gas connections are expected to be confined to trenching in order to extend them
from Madison Street into the project. 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.
As determined in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, it is anticipated that the project operation and special
event operations, will generate an annual demand of 21,855,400 kBTU of natural gas. According to the
LQGP EIR, at projected City build -out, residential units will use approximately 919,426,079 cubic feet of
natural gas per year (cf/year). For commercial uses, consumption will be 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, which is
equivalent to 1,485,030,724.4 kBTU. The project is anticipated to consume approximately 21,855,400
kBTU/year, which is approximately 1.47 percent of the City's natural gas consumption at build -out of the
City.
In addition to the City's projected natural gas consumption, the California Energy and Electric Utilities
estimates natural gas consumption within SoCalGas's planning area will be approximately 2,310 million
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-22 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
cf per day in 2030. The project would consume approximately 0.0025 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 California Code of Regulations (CCR) regarding energy
consumption. As a part of the project design features to reduce energy consumption, the project will
implement the use of:
• Specified use of Energy Star appliances.
• Installation of tankless water heater systems.
The implementation of these project design features will be included as an enforceable provision in the
Development Agreement, and will reduce the amount of natural gas consumed during project operation.
Therefore, the project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded
natural gas facilities.
Telecommunications
The project is located within Frontier and Charter Communications' service area 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 project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of
new or expanded telecommunication facilities.
Conclusion
The project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded off-site water,
wastewater treatment, storm water drainage systems, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities. The
connection to the existing IID substation facility will provide electricity to the site. The will serve letter
provided by IID indicates that the service provider has sufficient capacity to support the connection to
the substation. Communication between the project and the service providers during the project's
construction and connection to existing facilities will occur throughout project development. Impacts
would be less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-23 June 2021
Legend:
Project Boundary
•
■w— —
Existing Water Main
OProposed
C.V.W.D. Well Site
Proposed Public 8" Water Main
Proposed Public 12" Water Main
�12W-
Proposed Public 18" Water Main
�18W-
Notes: 1. Information shown is conceptual only.
Final engineering design plans may deviate.
2. Number and location of wells is preliminary &
subject to further discussion with C.V.W.D.
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� CONCEPTUAL WATER PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.15-1
Legend:
Project Boundary
•
Existing Sewer Main
— s —
Proposed 8" Sewer Main
Proposed 12" Sewer Main
�12S—
Proposed 15" Sewer Main
�15S—
Note: Information shown is conceptual only.
Final engineering design plans may deviate.
AVENUE 5 8rL___ —ems
AVENUE 60 s— _s J
MSA CONSULTING, INC./ j�� CONCEPTUAL SEWER PLAN
> PLANNING > CIVIL ENGINEERING > LAND SURVEYING
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
760.320.9811 msaconsultinginc.com
CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXHIBIT
4.15-2
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
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?
Groundwater is the primary source of domestic water supply in the Coachella Valley. CVWD is the largest
provider of potable water in the Coachella Valley and currently provides potable water to the City of La
Quinta. CVWD's 2012 adopted Water Management Plan (CVWMP) and 2015 Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP) have been developed to assist the agency in reliably meeting current and future water
demands in a cost-effective manner. The comprehensive Water Management Plan guides efforts to
eliminate overdraft, prevent groundwater level decline, protect water quality, and prevent land
subsidence. The 2015 UWMP 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 from the project site
during operation. Water consumed by the project was analyzed in the project -specific WSA/WSV
(Appendix M). The analysis of water resources and water supply is based upon the understanding of
projected water supplies as developed by CVWD and used for the WSA/WSV prepared and adopted for
the project, including estimates of available groundwater, Colorado River water, and SWP sources.
The domestic water supply (potable) for the project will be the Indio Subbasin of the Coachella Valley
Groundwater Basin via CVWD's potable water distribution system. As shown in Table 4.15-2, Coral
Mountain Resort Specific Plan Conceptual Land Use Summary, the project proposes the development
of the following building floor areas:
Table 4.15-2 Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Conceptual Land Use Summary
Planning Area
(PA)
Land Use
Category
Gross Land
Area
(Acres)
Non-
Residential
Building (SF)
Max.
Dwelling
Units (DU)
Max.
Hotel/Resort
Units (DU)
PA 1
GC
7.7
60,000'
PA II
LDR
232.3
496
PA 111
TC
120.8
57,0002
104
150
PA IV
OS -R
23.6
Right of Way
1.5
Total
385.9
117,000
600
150
Note: GC = General Commercial, LDR = Low Density Residential, TC = Tourist Commercial, OS -R = Open Space
Recreation
1. Consisting of retail commercial uses available to the general public.
2. Consisting of private resort -serving commercial uses available only to residents and hotel guests.
Based upon this analysis, the estimated total domestic water demand for indoor and outdoor use is
approximately 958.63 acre-feet per year (AFY), or 2.49 acre-feet per acre. The residential indoor demand
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 4.15-26
June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
estimate is 97.22 AFY, the non-residential indoor use estimate is 59.94 AFY, and the outdoor estimate is
801.47 AFY. This is indicated in Table 4.15-3, Estimated Project Water Service Demand for Residential,
Commercial and Other Uses.
Table 4.15-3 Estimated Project Water Service
Demand For Residential, Commercial and Other Uses
Land Use
AFY
Residential Indoor Demand
97.22
Non -Residential Indoor Demand
59.94
Outdoor Demand
801.47
Total Project Demand
958.63
This estimation includes indoor and outdoor use for the Residential and Non -Residential areas. This
quantity is approximately 0.49 -percent of the total project water to be supplied by the CVWD in 2040
(194,300 AFY).
The domestic water supply (potable) for the project will be groundwater from the Indio Subbasin in the
Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin via CVWD's potable water distribution system. Groundwater
storage will be used in dry years to make up the difference between the demand and the supply. The
Indio Subbasin has a storage capacity of approximately 29.8 million AF within the first 1,000 feet below
ground surface, simulating the benefit of a very large reservoir, and is capable of meeting the water
demands of the Coachella Valley for normal and extended drought periods, as determined in CVWD's
2015 UWMP. With almost 30 million AF of combined storage supplemented by groundwater
management planning adopted in the 2015 UWMP and 2010 CVWMP Update, the aquifer has sufficient
available water to supply the project and other present and anticipated needs for normal year, as well
as one or more multiple dry years, over the next 20 years. CVWD's groundwater management practices
include substantial groundwater replenishment through the Thomas E. Levy and Palm Desert
Groundwater Recharge Facilities to avoid long-term overdraft of the aquifer.
Normal Year
The Department of Water Resources (DWR) requires the supply reliability tables to include both potable
and recycled water for the normal year. This is indicated in the table below.
Table 4.15-4 Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AF)
Retail
2020
2030
2040
Supply Total (AF)
128,900
188,500
230,600
Demand Total (AF)
128,900
188,500
230,600
Difference (AF)
0
0
0
Per the 2015 UWMP, recycled water is not considered an urban water supply and is not delivered to
CVWD's urban water customers. Instead, recycled water is used to offset the groundwater pumping of
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-27 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
private well owners (mainly golf courses) to eliminate overdraft. Therefore, water use without recycled
water is presented in the table below. Table 4.15-5 more accurately represents CVWD's urban water
supply reliability.
Table 4.15-5 Normal Year Supply and
Demand Comparison (AF) — Urban Supply Only
Retail
2020
2030
2040
Supply Total (AF)
114,600
157,700
194,300
Demand Total (AF)
114,600
157,700
194,300
Difference (AF)
0
0
0
Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Years
Urban water supplies during the single dry year and multiple dry years are 100 percent reliable. Thus,
the supply and demand comparison for the single dry year and multiple dry years, shown in the table
below, is the same as the normal year.
Table 4.15-6 Single Dry Year and Muliple Dry Years
Supply and Demand Comparison (AF) — Urban Supply Only
Retail (Single Dry Year
and Multiple Dry Years)
2020
2030
2040
Supply Total (AF)
114,600
157,700
194,300
Demand Total (AF)
114,600
157,700
194,300
Difference (AF)
0
0
0
As indicated in the table below, total buildout water demand of the project is estimated to be
approximately 958.63 AFY, or 2.49 AF per acre, which represents approximately 0.49 percent of the total
anticipated urban demand of 194,300 AF in CVWD's urban water system projected for 2040. Per the
2015 UWMP Update, CVWD included water demand from new development that it assumed would
occur within its service area. The projected demand for the property's existing Specific Plan land uses
was already factored into the 2015 UWMP Update.
The project is requesting a General Plan Amendment from the existing land uses of Low Density
Residential, General Commercial and Open Space Recreational to Low Density Residential, Open Space
Recreation, General Commercial and Tourist Commercial. The Low Density Residential, Open Space
Recreation and General Commercial land uses proposed for the project are consistent with the current
General Plan land use designations. However, the project proposes to include approximately 120.8 acres
of Tourist Commercial in the project. The development under the current Specific Plan assumes 171.9
acres of golf, and 750 homes. As shown in Table 4.15-7, the residential indoor water demand of the
current permitted land uses is 121.52 AFY, 15.88 AFY for non-residential demand, and 921.14 AFY for
the outdoor demand. The total water demand under the current land use designations is 1,058.54 AFY
or 2.75 acre-feet per acre. This is approximately 0.54 percent of CVWD's projected demand in 2040.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-28 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4.15-7
Estimated Project Water Service Demand For Existing Specific Plan Land Uses
Land Use
AFY
Residential Indoor Demand
121.52
Non -Residential Indoor Demand
15.88
Outdoor Demand
921.14
Total Project Demand
1,058.54
Accordingly, buildout of the site under the existing land use designation would result in an increase of
99.82 AFY, or 10.4% more water use, when compared with the proposed project. The overall reduction
in water use for the proposed project, as compared to buildout under the approved General Plan land
uses, accounts for all water needed for the Wave Basin, including evaporation, as well as the elimination
of the 171.9 acres of golf course under the existing land use designation, as shown in Table 4.15-8.
Accordingly, the project will use less water than has been accounted for in CVWD's projections, including
the 2015 UWMP update.
Table 4.15-8 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply
Project
Proposed Project
Existing Specific Plan
Difference
Total CVWD Supply 2040
194,300 AFY
Total Demand (AFY)
958.63 AFY
1,058.54 AFY
99.82 AFY
Total Demand (AF/Acre)
2.49 AF/Acre
2.75 AF/Acre
0.26 AF/Acre
Percent of CVWD Supply
0.49 percent
0.54 percent
The Indio Subbasin has a capacity of approximately 29.8 million AF. It acts as a very large reservoir and
is capable of meeting the water demands of the Coachella Valley for extended periods.
As discussed in the 2010 CVWMP Update, CVWD has many programs to maximize the water resources
available to it including recharge of its Colorado River and SWP Exchange supplies, recycled wastewater,
desalinated shallow semi -perched brackish groundwater, conversion of groundwater uses to Canal
water and conservation including tiered water rates, a landscaping ordinance, and outreach and
education. The 2010 CVWMP Update and CVWD replenishment assessment programs establish a
comprehensive and managed effort to eliminate overdraft.
The 2016 CVWMP Status Report evaluated progress to date on eliminating overdraft. The report
illustrates the effectiveness of the CVWMP programs which helped reduce water consumption by 38
percent per capita, achieving (and substantially exceeding) the state -mandated reduction goal of 20
percent per capita. The report also shows that with continued implementation of CVWMP programs,
overdraft will be eliminated by approximately 2022. CVWMP tools for reducing overdraft include:
- Water conservation through demand management and efficient water use practices;
- Additional water supplies via the acquisition and development of new water supplies to meet
future needs;
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-29 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
- Groundwater recharge through the percolation of imported and recycled water;
- Source substitution through converting groundwater users to imported or recycled water sources
to reduce groundwater pumping.
- Monitoring through the ongoing measurement and evaluation of groundwater conditions to
determine the effectiveness of the CVWMP.
The effectiveness of the CVWMP's programs is measured by monitoring groundwater balance,
groundwater levels, groundwater quality, subsidence, and drain flows.
According to the 2016 Status Report, the eastern Coachella Valley area is showing positive results from
water conservation, source substitution (conversion of golf courses from groundwater to Canal water),
and groundwater recharge (Thomas E. Levy GRF). However, per the Status Report, the mid -Coachella
Valley area will have declining water levels until CVWMP programs reduce pumping through water
conservation (on-going), source substitution (conversion of golf courses from groundwater to Canal and
recycled water), and groundwater replenishment (proposed program to percolate Canal water near
Water Reclamation Plant No. 10 (WRP-10). According to the CVWD's 2019-2020 Annual Review, the mid -
Valley area is now benefitting from the CVWD's Palm Desert Groundwater Replensihment Facility.
According to the 2016 CVWMP Status Report, increased imported water recharge combined with
reduced pumping due to water conservation and source substitution are expected to bring the basin
into a long-term balance.Per CVWD's Urban Water Management Plan, the district has a 2020 target
water use demand of 473 Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD). CVWD's 2015 per capita daily water use of
383 GPCD was 19 percent below the 2020 target of 473 GPCD. CVWD has achieved its 2020 water use
target but continues to implement demand management measures to reduce per capita water use.
According to CVWD's 2019-2020 Annual Review, successful groundwater replenishment programs along
with continued efforts to conserve, reduce water waste and to connect customers to the nonpotable
water system for irrigation purposes resulted in the positive trends observed in groundwater storage
during the past 10 years. Since 2010, groundwater levels have stabilized or partially recovered. CWVD
customers saved 8.1 billion gallons of water in 2019 and reduced water use by 21 percent compared to
2013. It is expected that new customers will continue this trend of reduced water use as a result of the
implementation of plumbing upgrades required by the building code and updated landscape ordinance
requirements.
Per the 2015 UWMP and the 2010 CVWMP Update, CVWD included water demand from new
development that it assumed would occur within its service area. The projected demand for the project
will therefore account for only a small fraction of the projected demands as shown in Table 4.15-9.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-30 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4.15-9 Impact of Project Demand on Groundwater Supply
Coral Mountain Resort
Year (2035)
Total CVWD Supply
194,000 AF
Total Project Demand
958.63
Total Project Demand
2.49 AF/Acre
Percent of CVWD Supply
0.49
Source: Total supply extrapolated from 2015 UWMP, Table 7-4. Project demand extrapolated
from data Table 7 of the project WSA, based on a 20 -year projection as required by Senate Bill
610.
Note: 2020-2040 is the projected demand within the 20 -year WSA time frame.
Based on the information, analysis, and findings documented in the WSA for the project, CVWD has
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. This is based on the volume of water available in the
aquifer, CVWD's Colorado River contract supply, SWP Table A amounts, water rights and 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 the primary elements of
the 2010 CVWMP Update and 2015 UWMP, which includes the full utilization of imported water
supplies, purchase of additional water supplies, water conservation, and source substitution.
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, CVWD established a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) for outdoor water use
(landscape). In this area, the MAWA for the project site at buildout is 962 AFY. As previously stated, the
project will consume approximately 801.47 AFY of water for outdoor demand. This is compliant with
CVWD's MAWA and the City's corresponding landscape ordinance.
The City has adopted a water -efficient landscape ordinance (LQMC Chapt. 8.31) 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. The project's
outdoor water demand calculations assume implementation of these requirements in project
landscaping plans. 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 will be less than significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-31 June 2021
4.15 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 for 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 system. The wastewater system serves approximately
265,000 customers. The system collects municipal waste from residential and commercial users,
delivering the collected wastewater to one of six Wastewater Reclamation Plants. The system includes
approximately 1,100 miles of sewer, 34 lift stations and approximately 17,000 manholes.
The project is proposing a new 15 -inch and 12 -inch sewer main that would collect flow from the
development and convey it to an existing 15 -inch gravity sewer main at Avenue 58 and 12 -inch sewer
main off of Madison Street. The proposed sewer plan for the project is illustrated in Exhibit 4.15-2,
Conceptual Sewer Plan. Flows would then be delivered to CVWDs Wastewater Reclamation Plant No.4
(WRP-4). WRP-4 has a plant capacity of 9.9 MGD located in Thermal. The annual average flow to this
facility is approximately 4.75 MGD. The proposed project is estimated to generate wastewater at
156,839 GPD or 0.157 MDG, which is one percent of the plant's capacity, and which will increase flows
by 3.3% over existing volumes. The proposed project will not cause existing volumes or planned capacity
to be exceeded, and is consistent with the requirements set forth in CVWD's existing agreement to
provide sanitary sewer service to the project.
The project's final engineering plans will undergo additional review by CVWD to assure compliance with
all current and applicable requirements. As demonstrated above, 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 15,748,799 cubic yards of remaining capacity,
the EI Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of 145,530,000 cubic yards of solid waste, and Lamb
Canyon Disposal has a remaining solid waste capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards. Using the residential
solid waste generation factor of 0.41 tons per dwelling unit from the Riverside County EIR No. 521, 2.4
tons per 1,000 square feet for commercial uses, and 0.36 tons per hotel room, the project could generate
up to 581.8 tons or 3,674.5 cubic yards of solid waste per year at full buildout, as indicated in the table
below.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-32 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4.15-10 Solid Waste Generation
Land Use
Units
Rate
Solid Waste
(tons/year)
Solid Waste
(yard3/year)*
Residential
600 du
0.41 tons per du
246
2,184.5
Commercial
117,000 sf.
2.4 tons per 1,000 sf.
280.8
1,246.7
Hotel
150 rooms
0.365 tons per room
54.8
243.3
Total
581.6
3,674.5
Source: Generation Rates are from the 2015 Riverside County Environmental Impact Report No 521, Public
Facilities, Table 4.17-N; Hotel generation rate is from CalRecycle Service Sector Generation Rates.
*Residential waste (loose) = 8.88 cubic yards/ton; Commerical/industrial waste (loose) = 4.44 cubic yards/ton.
Source: EPA RecycleMania, Volume -to -Weight Conversion Chart.
Per Table 4.15-10, the project will generate 3,674.5 cubic yards of solid waste during the operation of
the residential and commercial land uses. The waste generated by the project is approximately 0.023
percent of the remaining capacity at Badlands Disposal site, 0.0025 percent of El Sobrante Landfill's
remaining capacity, and 0.019 percent of the remaining capacity of the Lamb Canyon Disposal site.
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 time,
for future landfill disposal. The most recent 15 -year projection by the RCDWR indicates that no additional
capacity is needed to dispose of countywide waste through 2024, with a remaining disposal capacity of
28,561,626 tons in the year 2024.
In addition, all future development would be required to comply with mandatory commercial and
residential recycling requirements of Assembly Bill 341. 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
is required to comply with the mandatory commercial and residential recycling requirements of
Assembly Bill 341. The California Green Building Standards Code (Cal Green) 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. Prior to applying for a permit, the contractor or property owner must submit a
Construction & Demolition Debris Management Plan to the City's Environmental Coordinator. There are
no impacts relative to applicable solid waste regulations because the project is required to, and will,
comply with all such regulations.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-33 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
4.15.5 Cumulative Impacts
New and existing local development within the City and the surrounding project area have the potential
to result in cumulative impacts when combined with build -out of the City of La Quinta General Plan. As
discussed below, the project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to the utilities and
service systems.
Water Supply
As discussed in the above analysis, the proposed project's water demand of 958.63 AFY would not
exceed the water supplies available to serve the project, and would in fact reduce water use when
compared to the existing Andalusia Specific Plan West. CVWD's 2015 UWMP and the WSA completed
for the project have determined that CVWD has sufficient supplies to meet this demand, in addition to
its other existing and projected demands, during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. The
proposed project's contribution to water supply impacts would also be less than significant.
Currently, the project is located within Specific Plan 03-067. Under SP 03-067, the development proposes
171.9 acres of golf, and 750 homes. As previously illustrated in Table 4.15-7, the residential indoor water
demand of the current permitted land uses is 121.52 AFY, 15.88 AFY for non-residential demand, and
921.02 AFY for the outdoor demand. The total water demand under the current land use designations is
1,058.45 AFY or 2.75 acre-feet per acre. Accordingly, buildout of the site under the existing land use
designation would result in an increase of 99.82 AFY , or 10.2% more water use, when compared with
the proposed project, which would consume 958.63 AFY. The project would result in a reduced water
use compared to the existing Specific Plan.
Buildout of the La Quinta General Plan could result in cumulatively significant impacts to water supplies
and infrastructure if not reviewed by the City and CVWD. Like the proposed project, future development
would be required to implement short-term and long-term water conservation efforst to ensure the
continued availability of this resource. Water -efficient landscaping design and management, compliance
with the City's Water efficient landscape ordinance, prohibitions on washing driveways and walkways
with water, excessive runoff of landscape irrigation water, and other wasteful water practices will be
applied to all future projects. According to the La Quinta General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(LQGP EIR), the City of La Quinta requires water conserving appliances, such as low -flush toilets and low -
flow showerheads and faucets in new developments. Furthermore, the City of La Quinta will continue to
coordinate and cooperate with CVWD to ensure that the groundwater aquifer is protected from
excessive extraction. Moreover, wastewater and recycled water continue to be treated and disinfected
to be reused for landscape irrigation and other purposes. The use of recycled water creates an additional
opportunity to maximize local water supply. CVWD WRP-7 and WRP-10 generate recycled water for
irrigation of golf courses and large landscaped areas. WRP-4 serves the communities of La Quinta to
Mecca. Effluent from WRP-4 is not currently recycled, however, CVWD anticipates that future demand
for recycled water will require tertiary treatment system at this location to be constructed. CVWD
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-34 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
expects the expansion of the WRP facilities with growth in the service area, and the WRPs have the area
to be expanded. With the adherence to local and regional water use and conservation guidelines
established by the City of La Quinta and CVWD, as well as state regulations establishing water reduction
goals, the project and future development would not result in cumulatively significant impacts.
Wastewater
The project would result in an increase to wastewater flows. 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 9.9 MGD.
The annual average flow to this facility is approximately 4.75 MGD (5,300 AFY). The proposed project is
estimated to generate wastewater at 156,839 GPD or 0.157 MGD, which is one percent of the plant's
capacity.
Buildout of the General Plan will result in increased demand on existing wastewater collection and
treatment facilities. According to the LQGP EIR, buildout of La Quinta would generate approximately 4.4
million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater, including both existing development and planned future
development. This level of wastewater generation is substantial; however it will not exceed the
combined treatment capacity at the CVWD treatment plants serving the City. WRP-4 has a current
capacity of 9.9 mgd and currently processes approximately 4.75 mgd. CVWD's WRP-7, located at
Madison Street and Avenue 38, and WRP-10, located in Palm Desert, also serve the CVWD service area.
WRP-7 has an existing plant capacity of 5 mgd, and the ability to expand to 7.5 mgd. WRP-10 has an
existing plant capacity of 18 mgd, and has the potential to expand to accept 22 to 24 mgd. As future
development occurs, existing facilities may need to be expanded to build out capacity to accommodate
wastewater generation, because CVWD serves multiple cities in addition to La Quinta. However,
between existing unmet capacity and expansion potential, CVWD expects to have sufficient capacity to
serve its service area's buildout.
Development in the General Plan area will occur gradually over time. CVWD will have an opportunity to
plan for increased development, including construction of new sewer collection facilities and increased
treatment capacity. CVWD will continue to review future development within its service area and
expansion of facilities, including WRP-7 and WRP-4, may be required to support future developments.
With the CVWD's review of future developments, impacts to wastewater infrastructure will not be
cumulatively considerable, and given that development of the subject property was already assumed in
the City General Plan and CVWD's long-term planning, the wastewater that will be generated by the
proposed project will not contribute to any signicant cumulative impacts.
Solid Waste
Buildout of the General Plan will result in the construction and operation of various land uses including
residential, commercial, and industrial uses, which would result in the increase of solid waste generated
in the area. As previously stated, the Badlands Disposal site has 15,748,799 cubic yards of remaining
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-35 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
capacity, the El Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of 145,530,000 cubic yards of solid waste, and
Lamb Canyon Disposal has a remaining solid waste capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards.
According to the La Quinta General Plan EIR, buildout of the City would result in 31,603 residential units,
and 9,632,074 square feet of commercial uses. Therefore, buildout of the City would result in 36,074.21
tons of solid waste annually, which converts to 217,699.58 cubic yards per year. This is indicated in the
table below.
Table 4.15-11 La Quinta General Plan Buildout Solid Waste Generation
Land Use
Units
Rate
Solid Waste
(tons/year)
Solid Waste
(yard3/year)*
Residential
31,603 du
0.41 tons per du
12,957.23
115,060.20
Commercial
9,632,074 sf.
2.4 tons per 1,000 sf.
23,116.98
102,639.39
Total
36,074.21
217,699.59
Source: Generation Rates are from the 2015 Riverside County Environmental Impact Report No 521, Public
Facilities, Table 4.17-N; Hotel generation rate is from CalRecycle Service Sector Generation Rates.
*Residential waste (loose) = 8.88 cubic yards/ton; Commerical/industrial waste (loose) = 4.44 cubic yards/ton.
Source: EPA RecycleMania, Volume -to -Weight Conversion Chart.
Based on the findings in Table 4.15-11, buildout of the City would result in 36,074.21 tons of solid waste
annually. This accounts for approximately 0.41 percent of Lamb Canyon Landfill's remaining capacity of
8.7 million tons, and 0.71 percent of Badlands Landfill, which has a remaining capacity of 5.1 million tons.
Buildout of the City would result in 217,699.59 cubic yards of solid waste annually. This accounts for
approximately 1.13 percent of Lamb Canyon Landfill's remaining capacity of 19,242,950 cubic yards, 0.15
percent of El Sobrante Landfill's remaining capacity of 145,530,000 cubic yards, and 1.38 percent of
Badlands Landfill, which has a remaining capacity of 15,748,799 cubic yards. As discussed in this section,
the project is conservatively projected to generate approximately 581.6 tons of solid waste per year and
1.59 tons per day. The landfills serving the City of La Quinta and the project site have an available
remaining capacity for the project and planned future growth in La Quinta and the surrounding areas.
There is potential for landfill extension at the Lamb Canyon Landfill and Badlands Landfill. Buildout of
the City, including 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, cumulative impacts
to solid waste would be less than significant.
Additionally, implementation of state and municipal requirements to reuse and recycle construction and
operation waste would lessen the amount of solid waste generated by the project and future
developments. When considered in conjunction with other development projects, solid waste generated
as a result of buildout of the City, including the proposed project, would not result in any significant
cumulative impacts.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-36 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Electricity
Buildout of the La Quinta General Plan 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 in order to maintain an adequate energy supply to IID customers and future customers. As
mentioned previously, IID estimates that electricity consumption within IID's planning area will be
approximately 4,641,267 MWh annually by 2031. See Section 4.5, Energy Resources, for further analysis.
Due to the resort uses proposed for the project, it is likely that the project would consume more
electricity than the uses currently approved in SP 03-067. However, the proposed project, as well as
future developments, would be required to implement state, regional, and local regulations regarding
electricity consumption in the City and IID's service area.
IID has joined California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) to collaborate on the development of
individual utility energy efficiency and demand -reduction targets, as described above. The programs
implemented by IID are designed to ensure reliable electricity facilities to meet future demands,
including the long term buildout of the General Plan. Additionally, IID has established a rate structure
that accommodates growth through the extension of facilities. Build out of the General Plan area is
expected to occur over time. Therefore, IID's expansion plans will be adjusted to accommodate future
growth in the service area.
The City of La Quinta's General Plan and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan also outlines measures
to reduce energy consumed by existing and future developments within the City (please see Section 4.5,
Energy Resoruces). Future developments would be required to adhere to state and local standards for
energy efficiency to reduce energy consumed by future development. These energy reduction measures
are also included in the City's General Plan.
The City's GHG Reduction Plan and General Plan, in conjunction with IID's measures will reduce the
relative consumption of electricity in the City at buildout and would not result in a significant cumulative
impact.
Natural Gas
Buildout of the City of La Quinta would result in additional natural gas demand within SoCalGas's service
area. SoCalGas has adequate policies, programs, and projects in place to provide energy to their users,
including the proposed project, for the foreseeable future. As described in Section 4.5, Energy
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-37 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Resources, SoCal Gas projects total gas demand to decline at an annual rate of 1 percent from 2020-
2035.
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 California
Energy and Electric Utilities estimates natural gas consumption within SoCalGas's planning area will be
approximately 2,310 million cf per day in 2030.
According to the LQGP EIR, at General Plan buildout La Quinta is expected to consume approximately
1,432,045,057.28 cf per year, or 3,923,411.11 cf per day. This is approximately 0.17 percent of the 2030
forecased consumption in SoCalGas's service area.
Due to the resort uses proposed for the project, it is likely that the project would consume somewhat
more natural gas than the uses currently approved in SP 03-067, but not in amounts that would
meaningfully change the anticipated total natural gas required to serve the City at full buildout. In
addition, the proposed project, as well as future developments, would be required to implement 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.
Telecommunication
Buildout of the City of La Quinta would result in increased demand for telecommunication services. The
project is located within Frontier's and Charter Communications' service areas for telecommunications.
Although buildout of the City would increase demand of telecommunication services, future
developments are required to participate in the design review process of telecommunication plans
associated with the future development. Therefore, demand would not be cumulatively considerable
and would not cause or contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
4.15.6 Mitigation Measures
No Mitigation Measures are required.
4.15.7 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Impacts associated with Utilities and Service Systems will be reduced to less than significant levels, with
project compliance with all design standards of the City of La Quinta, CVWD, IID, and SoCalGas.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-38 June 2021
4.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
4.15.8 Resources
1. CalRecylce Estimated Solid Wase Generation Rates, CalRecycle,
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates#Residential accessed
August 2020.
2. Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water and Management Planning Website
http://cvwd.org/543/Urban-Water-Management-Planning accessed July and August 2020.
3. Coachella Valley Water District 2019-2020 Annual Report
https://www.cvwd.org/blog.aspx?iid=15
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
https://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/14/genplan/general plan 2015/DEIR%20521/04-
17 PublicFacilities.pdf, accessed August 2020.
6. Environmental Protection Agency, RecycleMania Volume -to -Weight Conversion Chart
https://arch ive.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/tools/rogo/web/pdf/volume-weight-conversions.pdf,
accessed March 2021.
7. Riverside County Department of Waste Resources
https://www.rcwaste.org/business/planning/ciwmp accessed August 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
4.15-39 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
5.0 Other CEQA Sections
Chapter 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 Guidelines require a section of the document
to discuss significant unavoidable impacts, significant irreversible impacts (per Section 21100 (b)(2)),
and growth -inducing impacts (per Section 15126.2). These topics are discussed in this chapter.
5.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Per Section 15126.2 (c) of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR shall describe any significant impacts,
including those which can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of insignificance. Where there are
impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an alternative design, their implications and the
reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding their effect, should be described.
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
As determined in Chapter 4, Sections 4.1 through 4.15, the project would create impacts that are
significant and unavoidable to aesthetics and greenhouse gas emissions. The other environmental
topics resulted in impacts that could be mitigated to less than significant levels through adoption of
the specific mitigation measures specified in those sections. Significant and unavoidable impacts
related to aesthetics and greenhouse gases are discussed below.
Aesthetics
The project property is currently vacant and undeveloped with scattered desert vegetative cover of
various densities throughout the project. The vacant character of the project site allows for
unobstructed views of Coral Mountain, located west and southwest of the site, and the Santa Rosa
Mountains, west and south of the site. These mountains are visible to motorists and pedestrians
traveling along Avenue 58 (north) and Madison Street (east). Avenue 58 and Madison Street are
considered image corridors by the City of La Quinta since they provide public views of the natural
landscape created by Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains. On the project site, areas of
dense vegetation partially obstruct the base of the mountains, depending on viewpoint location.
However, the midrange and peaks of the mountains are completely visible from public viewpoints.
Development of the proposed project would result in impacts to the scenic vistas, Coral Mountain
and the Santa Rosa Mountains, when viewed from certain areas along the public rights -of -ways.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-1 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
Through the analysis of aesthetic resources, it was determined that the perimeter landscaping and
block walls, in conjunction with the development of the low density residential structures proposed
in Planning Area II, adjacent to Avenue 58 and Madison Street, would result in the obstruction of Coral
Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
Therefore, development of the project property would impact views of these scenic resources.
However, when traveling along Avenue 58 and Madison Street the views of Coral Mountain and the
Santa Rosa Mountains change depending on the landscaping at the various locations, as well as the
buildings located near the project frontage. At various public viewshed locations, Coral Mountain may
be visible to the passing motorist or pedestrian, while at other locations the views of Coral Mountain
may be partially obstructed briefly by a tree with a large canopy, the perimeter walls, and roofs of a
residential unit. Development of the proposed project will not completely remove the views of Coral
Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains from public view. While the project's impacts on views of
Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains would be essentially the same as the impacts of any
development of the project site, the project's perimeter walls, landscaping, and structures will
partially obstruct views of these scenic resources, which is considered a significant impact. Mitigation
to reduce impacts includes Mitigation Measure AES -1, which requires the perimeter walls to be
setback from the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30
feet (10 feet more than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review
and approval of final perimeter wall and landscape plans, and Mitigation Measure AES -2, which
requires a minimum setback of 75 feet between any residential structure and the Madison Street and
Avenue 58 public rights-of-way. Even with Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2, the impacts on
scenic resources are significant and unavoidable.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG emissions are understood to be inherently cumulative in nature with global implications.
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. The GHG emissions standards and strategies to which the project is held are those
that have resulted in measurable statewide reductions in per capita and total GHG emissions,
reaching the target 1990 levels. Moreover, according to the CARB report on California Greenhouse
Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017, California's GHG emissions have followed a declining trend between
2007 and 2017.
The GHG quantification and analysis conducted for this project resulted in a practicable strategy of
Project Design Features (PDFs) drawn from California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
(CAPCOA) methodology as energy-saving and sustainable measures integral to the project
undertaking and aimed at meeting the GHG emissions per capita efficiency target set forth in
California. Without the PDF strategy, the total GHG emissions from all project sources would be
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-2 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
17,270.47 MTCO2e per year. Considering a service population of 2,672, this total emission quantity
would result in 6.46 MTCO2e per service population, which would be in excess of the efficiency target
of 3.65 MTCO2e per service population, per year. By implementing the PDFs, total GHG emissions
from all project sources would be reduced to 12,078.31 MTCO2e per year. Although PDFs would lower
GHG emissions by approximately 30%, the resulting efficiency of 4.52 MTCO2e per service population,
per year, would still exceed the intended target by 0.87 MTCO2e per service population, per year.
The estimated exceedance is equivalent to approximately 2,400 MTCO2e per year. As a result, a
mitigation approach involving the purchase of carbon credits from a California Air Resources Board
(CARB)-approved carbon registry with independent third -party verification was developed. The
estimated carbon credit amount would be equivalent to 2,400 MTCO2e per year in order to meet the
efficiency target. 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, and because even
with the purchase of carbon credits the project's actual GHG emissions exceed the applicable
threshold (even though the emissions, net of carbon credits, do not), this analysis conservatively
considers the project to have a significant and unavoidable impact concerning GHG emissions in a
manner that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.
5.3 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Per CEQA Guideline 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.
Project Analysis
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. The proposed
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 the effect on biological resources; and
• Water supply for project operation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-3 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
Development of the proposed 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 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems).
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 4.5, 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 4.2
Require that off-road diesel construction equipment (greater than 150 horsepower) complies with
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 emissions
standards, and that all construction equipment is tuned and maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer's specifications. The use of Tier 3 engines or higher during project construction would
assist in 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 site would result in the consumption of electricity, natural gas,
and petroleum use during the life of the project. As determined in Section 4.5, 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 shorter distances between each use, pedestrian connections throughout the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-4 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
property, a multi -modal transportation system to appeal to motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and
drivers of electric vehicles, as well as providing ride -sharing programs for employees. These project
features reduce project -related energy consumption, avoiding the inefficient consumption of energy
during project operation.
The construction of the proposed project will change the physical environment of the project site,
which is currently vacant and undeveloped. The site is surrounded by development to the north, east,
and south, and vacant land to the north, west, and south. Although the proposed project will result
in the permanent loss of approximately 386 acres of vacant land, the project will be required to pay
fees to assure the off-site conservation of habitat lands for sensitive species covered by the Coachella
Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). Therefore, the loss of biological
resources will be less than significant with the payment of fees to avoid impacts on special status
species. Additionally, the project is required to conduct burrowing owl, bat, and nesting bird surveys
to determine whether roosting or nesting is occurring at the site. If roosting or nesting is discovered
at the project site during the surveys, the mitigation measures include performance standards to
ensure construction of the project does not significant impact biological resources (see Section 4.3,
Biological Resources).
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 958.63 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 2010 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update 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 Specific Plan, which includes 750 low density residential
homes, 8.4 acres of neighborhood commercial uses, and a golf course. The existing Specific Plan uses
would result in 1,058.54 AFY of water consumption annually. This is an increase of 99.97 AFY
compared to the proposed project, which would consume approximately 958.63 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 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, and
Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. See Section 4.5, Energy Resources,
Section 4.3, Biological Resources, Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 4.15,
Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR for further discussion.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-5 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
5.4 Growth -Inducing Impacts
Per Section 15126.2 (e), the EIR shall discuss the ways in which the proposed 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. The EIR
shall also discuss project characteristics that 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 proposed project is currently included in a previously
approved specific plan, Andalusia at Coral Mountain. Andalusia East is currently under development,
providing low density residential units, an 18 -hole golf course, a clubhouse and associated amenities.
Andalusia West proposes residential and golf course uses.
In order to achieve the land use goals of the properties east and west of Madison Street, the two
areas are to be separated and governed by two specific plans. No changes to the land uses,
development standards or guidelines are proposed for Andalusia East, and buildout of SP 03-067 on
the east side of Madison Street will proceed as currently planned. The approximately 386 -acre area
west of Madison Street will be governed by the Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, a new Specific
Plan that will address only the westerly area.
The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Specific Plan Amendment
and new Specific Plan, as well as a Tentative Tract Map, a Development Agreement, and Site
Development Permit(s) leading to the development of a mix of uses including residential, resort,
commercial, and recreational uses on 386 acres. The project proposes 496 low density residential
units on approximately 232.3 acres, a full-service resort hotel (up to 150 keys), 104 resort residential
units, and 57,000 square feet of resort commercial uses on approximately 120.8 acres, 60,000 square
feet of neighborhood commercial uses on 7.7 acres, and open space recreational uses on 23.6 acres.
Additionally, an artificial Wave basin is proposed on approximately 16.62 acres of the site.
As described in this EIR, the proposed project could add approximately 1,698 new residents to the
City based on estimates generated by Urban Crossroads, Inc., in the VMT Evaluation (Appendix 1.2).
The VMT Evaluation also estimates that the project would result in 674 employees from the operation
of the hotel, Wave Basin, and commercial retail uses, and 300 temporary hotel occupants. The 300
temporary hotel occupants include the 2 guests per room of the 150 -room resort hotel. The service
population generated by the project is 2,672 people. The 150 hotel keys will not lead to permanent
residents, however, the resort hotel, commercial uses and Wave Basin components of the project
would induce growth in employment opportunities required for the operation of the hotel and Wave
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-6 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
Basin portion of the site, as well as the commercial retail portion of the site. 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 40,660 people in 2020. The project's addition of 1,698 residents would result in 42,358
residents of La Quinta, which is less than the City projected 2035 population. The project would
increase the City's population by 4.2 percent, assuming that 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 750 low-density residential housing units, a golf course, and 8.4 acres
of commercial in the northeast corner of the site. According to the DOF, there are approximately 2.60
people within each household in La Quinta. Therefore, the existing entitled property would generate
approximately 1,950 new residents (750 dwelling units x 2.60 people per household). This is
approximately 252 more residents than the proposed project. However, the proposed project would
likely generate more employment opportunities due to the addition of the resort hotel, commercial,
and Wave Basin facility. As previously stated, the project would generate temporary resort hotel
guests (300 people) and approximately 674 employees. The previously entitled project would induce
growth in employment generated by the golf course and 8.4 acres of commercial, however, operation
of the golf course and commercial area would likely result in less employment opportunities onsite
as compared to the proposed project. 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 674 jobs, which would result in 17,522 jobs in La Quinta. The project would represent 3.1
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 proposed project lies adjacent to the existing paved roadways, Avenue 58 (north) and Madison
Street (east). Extensions of these roadways are not proposed as part of project implementation.
Avenue 60, south of the proposed project, provides approximately 750 feet of paved access (from the
Madison Street intersection) to the residential properties south of the site. Implementation of the
proposed project will extend Avenue 60 approximately 525 feet to the west, to provide access to the
southern portion of the project property, but will not extend or provide access beyond the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-7 June 2021
5.0 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
The project will be required to make offsite improvements for electrical power to the site. The project
will be required to install an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600
Avenue 58 and extend a distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed along
Avenue 58 as part of the proposed upgrades. The extension of IID's infrastructure will provide
electricity exclusivity to the proposed project and will not extend or provide service to other
undeveloped properties.
Water lines currently occur along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, and sanitary sewer lines occur on
Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. No additional extensions of infrastructure will be required.
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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
5-8 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, 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 Coral Mountain Resort project ("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, Found to have No Impact, is included in this Draft EIR. Chapter 4
contains a complete analysis of all impacts which the NOP determined could have an effect on the
environment.
The latest CEQA Guideline thresholds, established in the 2020 CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist,
were used in the analysis of this Draft EIR. The following discussion presents the analysis of the effects
related to agriculture and forestry, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and
planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, recreation, and wildfire determined to
have no potential to impact the environment, per the 2020 CEQA Guidelines.
6.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
Threshold 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?
Historically, agriculture has been a major economic sector in the eastern portion of the Coachella
Valley. Although most of the farms within the incorporated regions of La Quinta no longer exist,
agriculture is still an economic factor east of the incorporated boundary and within the City's Sphere
of Influence (SOI).
Per the most recent (2016) California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site is
located in an area designated as Farmland of Local Importance. Therefore, the project will not convert
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use.
According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1959 topographic map, Palm Desert
Quadrangle (15 -minute series), the project site operated as agricultural land in the past, likely
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-1 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
vineyards. Historical aerial imagery dating back from 1996 indicates that the site had been cleared of
all agricultural remnants prior to 1996. The project site currently lies within a suburban area of La
Quinta, with residential uses to the north, east and south.
Additionally, the project area currently is designated Low Density Residential, Open Space Recreational
and General Commercial by the City of La Quinta, and has been since 1993 when the property was
annexed to the City. The project site is not currently designated within an agriculture land use category
and the site has not been in agricultural use for over 25 years. Overall, the project will not convert
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use.
Moreover, the project site is not in use as Farmland of Local Importance and is not planned for such
use in the General Plan. No impact will occur.
Threshold b: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
The project property is not under a Williamson Act contract. Additionally, there are no lands with a
Williamson Act contract in the immediate project vicinity.
The project does not lie within an area zoned for agriculture. The City's zoning designation for the
proposed site is currently Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), and Neighborhood
Commercial (CN). Therefore, the project will have no impact on zoning for agricultural uses.
Threshold c: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land, timberland,
or timberland zoned Timberland Production?
Threshold d: Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use?
The proposed project will occur in an existing suburban desert setting zoned for Low Density
Residential (RL), Neighborhood Commercial (CN) and Golf Course (GC). The project includes a Change
of Zone (CZ) to RL, CN, Tourist Commercial (CT) and Parks and Recreation (PR). No forest land,
timberland or timberland zoned for timberland production occurs on the project site or in the
surrounding area because forest vegetation is not characteristic of the Coachella Valley desert
environment. Therefore, the project will have no impact on zoning for, or conversion of timberland or
lands designated for forestry; nor will the project result in the loss or conversion of forest land.
Threshold 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?
The project site will not result in conversion of any active farmland or forest land because no farmland
or forest land is currently situated within or adjacent to the project. Therefore, there are no impacts.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-2 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
6.2 Geology and Soils
Threshold 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?
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides the City of La Quinta with sanitary sewer
collection and treatment, and according to the 2035 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, including the project site, is treated at the Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant, which has
the capacity of 9.5 million gallons per day (MGD), and current daily treatment of 5 MGD. 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 site will be provided with sewer service via existing infrastructure.
The project is generally consistent in scope to that planned for the property in the City's General Plan.
CVWD bases its infrastructure plans, in part, on the build out potential of projects within its service
area, and has the ability, through its rate structure, to expand facilities as demand increases. Based on
the Mid -Valley plant's current daily processing of 5 MGD, and the project's anticipated sanitary sewer
generation of 156,839 GPD or 0.157 MGD, the Mid -Valley plant has current capacity to serve the
proposed project now and in the future. The project will not use septic systems. The project proposes
to connect with the existing sewer infrastructure to provide sewer to the residents and guests of the
proposed project. Because the project will not use septic systems, the project will have no impact on
soils required to support septic systems.
6.3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 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?
The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a private airstrip. The
Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport is located approximately 4.25 miles to the east of the proposed
project. As a result, the project is located outside of the airport's influence and planning area. Flights
approaching and departing the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport may fly over the City and the
project site with an intermittent frequency. The project will neither cause a safety hazard, nor will
airport noise impact the project, and no impact will occur.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-3 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
6.4 Land Use and Planning
Threshold a: Physically divide an established community?
The proposed project property encompasses approximately 929 acres on both sides of Madison Street
south of Avenue 58. The project includes a Specific Plan Amendment to separate the west 386 acres
of what is currently Specific Plan 03-067 (SP 03-067). The east half of the Specific Plan area will continue
to develop as a self-contained golf country club, and the separation of the western 386 acres will have
no effect on the existing community, since it is physically separated from the 386 acres by Madison
Street, and not dependent on these lands.
The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan and associated applications propose a master planned
community on the western 386 acres of currently vacant land that will include residential, commercial,
open space, recreational, and resort uses in a self-contained resort community.
The project site is surrounded by developed residential communities to the north, east, and south,
vacant land to the west and south, and Coral Mountain to the southwest. The surrounding
developments are gated and operate separately from each other. The proposed project occurs on
vacant land, and will not impact operation of surrounding residential projects, currently or in the
future. No impact will occur.
6.5 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 mineral resources that form the Coachella Valley's desert floor primarily consists of sand, gravel
(aggregate) and other important mineral deposits that have eroded from the surrounding mountains
and hills. To ensure the protection of important mineral resources, the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) developed mineral land classification maps and reports to identify
the presence or absence of suitable sources of aggregate (sand, gravel or stone deposits), and organize
them into Mineral Resource Zones. According to the Mineral Land Classification Map, the project site
is located within Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1) and Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3). The
northeast portion of the project is located with the MRZ-1 zone, which specifies areas where geologic
information indicates no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present. The southwest
portion of the project property is located within the MRZ-3 zone which indicates areas containing
known or inferred mineral occurrences where the significance cannot be evaluated from available
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-4 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
data. The Mineral Resource Zone Map (Exhibit III -1), within the 2035 La Quinta General Plan, also
classifies the project property to be located within zones MRZ-1 and MRZ-3.
Lands that fall under the MRZ-3 designation make up a small portion of La Quinta. These areas are
known to contain mineral deposits, however, there have been no evaluations on the significance of
these resources. 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 vacant land designated for low density residential development.
A barrow pit, used temporarily for the development of the Thomas Levy water recharge facility, is
located within the southwest corner of the project area, in an area designated MRZ-3. However, the
use was temporary, and the barrow pit is not currently used for mining. The site has been designated
for low density residential and golf course uses, and the barrow pit has been abandoned.
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 its annexation to the City in 1993.
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 use of a small portion of the
property as a barrow pit was temporary and associated with the construction of the Thomas Levy
water recharge facility to the northwest. The land has for many years been designated for residential
and golf course development, and not for mineral extraction. Therefore, the proposed project will have
no impact on mineral resources.
6.6 Noise
Threshold c: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The project site is located approximately 19 miles southeast of Palm Springs International Airport, and
4.25 miles west of the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport. Therefore, the project site is not located
within two miles of a public airport or in the vicinity of a private airstrip, and as such, no impact related
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-5 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
to the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive airport related noise
levels is anticipated.
6.7 Population and Housing
Threshold 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)?
A maximum of 600 dwelling units are proposed to be developed within the Coral Mountain Resort
Specific Plan, representing fewer units than currently allowed under SP 03-067. No change is proposed
for the east half of the project area, which will continue to develop under that Specific Plan. According
to the 2020 California Department of Finance population and housing estimates, the City of La Quinta's
total population is approximately 40,660 with an average household size of 2.60 persons. The City of
La Quinta's General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) forecast a population of 46,297
people by year 2035.
As a result of project build -out, the proposed development could add approximately 1,698 new
residents to the City for an approximate population of 42,358. This is an increase of 4.2 percent, and
still below the projected 2035 population forecast of 46,297. 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, including those under SP 03-067 on both sides of
Madison Street. In addition, this projected increase is a conservative figure because it assumes that
the project's future residents will not be current residents of La Quinta. However, it is anticipated that
some of the project's residents will be existing residents from within the City and/or from neighboring
incorporated and unincorporated areas. Additionally, the 150 hotel rooms will not lead to permanent
residents of the project. The employment generated by the project will include hotel, commercial and
surf -related employees. 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.
The proposed project lies adjacent to existing paved roadways, Avenue 58 (north) and Madison Street
(east). Extensions of these roadways are not proposed as part of project implementation. Avenue 60,
south of the proposed project, provides approximately 750 feet of paved access (from the Madison
Street intersection) to the residential properties south of the site. Implementation of the proposed
project will extend Avenue 60 approximately 525 feet to the west, to provide access to the southern
portion of the project property, but cannot be extended further due to the existing Coral Mountain
and Dike 4.
The project will be required to make offsite improvements for electrical power to the site. The project
will be required to install an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-6 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
Avenue 58 and extend a distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed along
Avenue 58 as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction of the conduits and line extension would
occur in the existing right-of-way. The project's connection to the existing IID infrastructure will occur
during the first phase of development and will be for exclusive use of the proposed project, and will
not expand service potential for the area.
Water lines currently occur along Avenue 58 and Madison Street, and sanitary sewer lines occur on
Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. No additional extensions of infrastructure will be required.
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 included in the City of La Quinta's General Plan.
Therefore, the project will not induce growth, either directly or indirectly, and no impact will occur.
Threshold b: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The east half of the project is currently partially developed with a golf country club, and the
development of that area will continue as governed by SP 03-067, while the west half of the site is
currently vacant, and will not displace either housing or people. Therefore, there would be no impact.
6.8 Recreation
Threshold a: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Threshold b: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
The project proposes a mixed-use development consisting of commercial, tourist commercial, low
density residential, and open space recreational uses on approximately 386 acres of vacant land. The
project proposes the development of golf practice facilities (i.e., par 3 golf, or putting green), clubhouse
and resort amenities, supporting uses and the Wave basin. Additional recreational uses include:
• The Wave Club will function as a private clubhouse with amenities for exclusive use by project
residents and guests.
• The Farm will include private resort -serving entertainment and fitness facilities. It will offer a
wide range of community and active lifestyle amenities, including hiking, biking, bicycle pump
track, fitness, and swimming pool areas. In addition, spa and dining facilities may be provided
for residents and hotel guests.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-7 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
• Planning Area IV, located on approximately 24 acres on the western side of the project
property, allows open space, and low -impact active and passive recreational activities, such as
hiking, biking, and ropes courses.
The recreational amenities, parks, and open space areas proposed within the project would
substantially reduce use of the City's parks and recreation facilities by project residents because the
proposed site would provide various recreational opportunities within the project boundaries. Some
residents may attend events and participate in activities at local parks; however, such visits are
expected to be minimal. The project will comply with the City's parkland in lieu fee (Quimby) and other
development impact fee requirements.
Since the project will comply with Quimby fees, and the project proposes extensive on-site recreational
facilities, the project will not result impact recreation.
6,9 Wildfire
Threshold a: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Threshold 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?
Threshold c: Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water resources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
Threshold 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 project site is currently characterized as vacant land with scattered vegetation of varying densities.
Vegetation within the project area includes Desert Saltbush scrub, Tamarisk scrub, Mesquite
Hummock, and Sonoran creosote. Residential land uses surround the property to the north and east.
The property's western and southern boundaries abut vacant land and Coral Mountain. Scattered
residential estate properties lie south of the project site.
According to CAL Fire's Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) in State Responsibility Areas (SRA) Map, the
project site is not located in an SRA or located in an area classified as very high fire hazard severity
zone. Per CAL Fire's map, the property is located in a (incorporated) Local Responsibility Area (LRA)
that is designated "non -Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone". The FHSZ map designates the area west
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-8 June 2021
6.0 EFFECTS FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT
of the project site, i.e., Coral Mountain, as a Federal Responsibility Area (FRA). However, this site is
also not designated as a very high, high or moderate FHSZ. The project is not located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as very high, high, or moderate fire hazard severity zones,
therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
Wildfire risk is related to a number of parameters, including fuel loading (vegetation), fire weather
(winds, temperatures, humidity levels and fuel moisture contents) and topography (degree of slope).
Steep slopes contribute to fire hazards by intensifying the effects of wind and make fire suppression
difficult. Fuels such as grass are highly flammable because they have a high surface area to mass ratio
and require less heat to reach the ignition point. According to the Riverside County General Plan,
wildfire susceptibility is moderate to low in the valley and desert regions on the western and eastern
sides of the Salton Sea. The project is not located in or near a State Responsibility Area, or an area
classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, the project site is not expected to expose
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
In addition to this, the La Quinta General Plan (LQGP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) states that
fire hazards exist where wildland areas are adjacent to or are intermixed with urbanized areas. The flat
urbanized areas of La Quinta are considered very low wildfire hazard areas. The project will not expose
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires because the City
of La Quinta does not provide conditions, such as dense vegetation, conducive for the spread of
wildfires.
The project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan because it will provide emergency fire access to the
project site, and will not alter the City's existing street system. Emergency access would be compliant
with the standards of the Fire Department to ensure proper vehicular access for emergency vehicles
to the site. As a result, the project is not expected to require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment.
Wildfires are not expected to occur at the project site, or within the City of La Quinta. This is due to
the Granitic Rock and sparse vegetation that characterize the Santa Rosa Mountains, as well as the
developed and landscaped urban areas of La Quinta. Since the City is not expected to be impacted by
wildfires, the project would not 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 as a result of a wildfire. No impact is expected to result from the project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
6-9 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
7.0 Alternatives
Chapter 7.0 Alternatives
7.1 Introduction
This chapter provides a comparative analysis of the environmental effects of alternatives to the
proposed Coral Mountain Resort project ("project"). This analysis has been prepared in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Per CEQA, it is required that an
environmental impact report (EIR) describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to
the location of the 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. This section identifies and describes alternatives to the
proposed project, evaluates the environmental impacts that would result from each of these
alternatives, and compares these with the proposed project, as required by CEQA.
Key provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6) relating to this alternative's analysis
are summarized below:
• 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 impact. The No Project analysis
shall discuss the existing conditions.
• Additionally, the alternatives 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 would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects
of the project.
• Only 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 feasible alternative locations exist, it must disclose the reasons for this
conclusion, and should include the reasons 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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-1 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
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.
7.2 Project Objectives
The State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to include a statement of objectives that addresses the
underlying purpose of the project.
Development of the Coral Mountain Resort project would require the implementation of the
following proposed entitlements:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA) - The General Plan Amendment (GPA 2019-0002) will amend
the current General Plan land use designations from General Commercial, Low Density
Residential, Open Space — Recreation, to Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential,
Resort, and Open Space - Recreation.
• Zone Change (ZC) — The Zone Change (ZC 2019-0004) will revise the existing zoning of the
Specific Plan Area from Neighborhood Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Golf Course,
to Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL), Parks and Recreation (PR),
and Tourist Commercial (TC).
• Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) — SPA 2019-0003 is being processed to remove the area west
of Madison Street from the currently approved Andalusia Specific Plan area, thus, creating
two separate and distinct communities, "Coral Mountain Resort", west of Madison Street, and
"Andalusia Country Club", east of Madison Street. The Specific Plan Amendment will result in
only the deletion of the westerly 386 acres. No changes to land use designations, densities or
intensities, development standards or guidelines are proposed for the lands east of Madison
Street.
• Specific Plan (SP) — The Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan (SP 2020-0002) will be adopted
as the master plan governing the allowable land uses, development standards and design
guidelines for the westerly 386 -acre portion of the project.
• Tentative Tract Map (TTM) —TTM 2019-0005 will implement the Specific Plan and subdivide
all of PA III, the Wave resort, and the western corner of PA II into lots suitable for the
development of the uses permitted for these areas in the Specific Plan. Future TTMs may be
filed with each phase of development as necessary to implement the balance of the project.
• Site Development Permit (SDP): An SDP for the Wave Basin is being sought to establish the
location, architectural design, photometric plans, and landscape plans for the Wave Basin
along with associated mechanical equipment (i.e., winch plans, and improvements) (Planning
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-2 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Area III -B). Future SDPs will be filed with each phase of development as necessary to
implement the balance of the project.
• Development Agreement (DA): The applicant proposes to enter into a DA with the City, vesting
certain entitlements, development rights and project conditions for the agreed term of the DA,
and securing certain public benefits for the City. The project DA will ensure that the project will
not have a negative net fiscal impact to the City; ensure that short-term rentals are addressed
for all uses and planning areas; vest the applicant's right to develop the project subject to the
rules, regulations, and conditions in effect at the time the DA becomes effective; ensure that
all required infrastructure and public facilities are properly completed in a timely manner to
serve the project and avoid impacts to the surrounding community; ensure the enforceability
of the project mitigation measures; and address any other issues of concern.
As referenced in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, of this Draft EIR, the project site is currently a part
of the "Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan 03-067", which includes the area south of Avenue
58 and east and west of Madison Street. An amendment is proposed to Specific Plan 03-067 to remove
the area west of Madison Street from the Specific Plan area, thus, creating two separate and distinct
communities. When amended, SP 03-067 is expected to continue to build out as it has and is currently,
and no change to those conditions is expected. Specific Plan 2020-0002, the Coral Mountain Resort
Specific Plan will establish a new master plan and development standards for the currently vacant
386 -acre property west of Madison Street to allow creation of a boutique resort and master -planned
community. This analysis of project alternatives, therefore, addresses only the westerly 386 -acre
property.
The project will result in 232.3 acres for 496 dwelling units, a surf basin facility on 16.62 acres, 104
dwelling units, 150 hotel rooms, and 57,000 square feet of private resort -serving commercial uses
available to residents and hotel guests, on approximately 120.8 acres, 7.7 acres with up to 60,000
square feet of retail commercial uses available to the general public, and Open Space Recreation land
uses on approximately 23.6 acres in the southwest portion of the site.
In addition to the proposed onsite development, project implementation will also include the
installation of an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation, located at 81600 Avenue 58.
Construction for the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right-of-way.
Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15124(b), the description of the project includes the
following statement of objectives for the Coral Mountain Resort project, including the underlying
purpose of the project and its benefits, which can be used by the decision makers to help identify and
evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives, as well as make findings and a statement of overriding
considerations, if necessary. In order to ensure the functional integrity, economic viability,
environmental sensitivity, and positive aesthetic contribution of the project, the following project
objectives were established:
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-3 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
• To implement a plan that recognizes and responds to the natural and aesthetic character of
the property.
• To create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales
tax revenues in order to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
• To promote walkability and non -motorized connectivity as an integral part of the project
design, including (1) establishing residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use
trails that connect neighborhoods throughout the project; and (2) providing "walk streets" in
the Resort area to provide internal connection between facilities within the Resort and the
Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
• Provide a variety of open space and recreational uses (active and passive).
• Design a planned community that complements existing development in the surrounding area
and is compatible with the surrounding environment.
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
7.3 Alternatives Considered & 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. Additionally, alternatives may be
eliminated from detailed consideration in the EIR if they fail to meet most of the project objectives,
or do not avoid any significant environmental effects. This section identifies the alternative
considered but rejected as infeasible.
CEQA Guidelines requires examination of an alternative location for the project if such locations
would result in the avoidance of or lessening of significant impacts. As noted above, the project
objectives specifically relate to the existing Coral Mountain Resort property, which is currently
undeveloped and vacant. Additionally, the project applicant has not been able to locate a suitable
alternative location of at least 380 acres that is available for purchase and that would substantially
reduce any of the significant impacts of the proposed project.
The benefit of developing the proposed project at the site allows for achieving the project's objectives
to create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales tax
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-4 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
revenues to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability. Moreover, the
location of the property, which includes open space areas to the west and south, provides a unique
location for the proposed resort use. In addition to the foregoing, the property owner does not own
or control any other suitable properties in the area, therefore, the relocation of the proposed project
is not feasible.
7.4 Alternatives Evaluated in Detail
The following alternatives were selected for evaluation in this Draft EIR:
1. Alternative 1— No Project/No Build
The project site, under this Alternative, would remain in its current and existing vacant condition. No
development would occur at the site. The existing visual character and visual resources would remain
the same, and none of the significant impacts of the project would occur.
2. Alternative 2 — No Project/Existing Entitlements
Under this Alternative, the property would be developed under the existing Andalusia at Coral
Mountain Specific Plan (03-067). This Alternative would develop approximately 8.4 acres of General
Commercial, 204.2 acres of Low Density Residential, and approximately 171.9 acres of Open Space
(Recreation) land uses. Alternative 2 would include the development of 750 low density residential
units and a golf course. It is anticipated that the golf course would be privately owned and would be
operated as a resort -style course that is available to the public to play on a daily fee basis to ensure
economic viability.
3. Alternative 3 — Reduced Density
The project would be reduced by one-third of the proposed density of the project under this
Alternative. Therefore, this Reduced Density Alternative would develop 400 residential dwelling units,
100 resort/hotel rooms, 38,000 square feet of resort commercial uses, and 40,000 square feet of
neighborhood commercial uses. The Wave Basin and other proposed recreational amenities would
remain part of the project as presently proposed.
4. Alternative 4 — Golf/Resort Hotel
This Alternative would develop a resort hotel of 150 hotel rooms and associated recreational,
restaurant and retail amenities, an 18 -hole championship golf course that would be open to the public
to play on a daily fee basis, and 600 low-density residential units, but would not include the Wave
Basin and related uses.
5. Alternative 5 — Lake Amenity/No Hotel
This Alternative would develop a lake amenity, instead of the Wave Basin, and would include 750 low-
density residential units and 8.4 acres of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-5 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
consistent with the existing entitlements for the project site. The lake would be approximately 75
acres, and would be used for typical lake uses, including small electric boats, sailing, kayaking and
paddle boarding (but not gas -powered boats or recreational watercraft).
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. This
comparison of impacts assumes that the Mitigation Measures identified for each topic in this Draft
EIR would also be incorporated into the alternatives.
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.
Comparative analyses were generated in order to measure impacts of environmental topics such as
air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation of each alternative. Urban
Crossroads, Inc. provided a Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Comparison
(Appendix N), which, based on the components of each alternative, predicted the potential trip
generated with each alternative, and associated air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. Increases
or decreases in vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) associated with each alternative is provided in Appendix
N.
Air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the development of each alternative
were predicted based on trip generation changes. For example, if an alternative generated more trips
than the proposed project, it was concluded that the alternative would result in increased air quality
and GHG emissions as compared to the project (where an increase in daily trips would proportionately
result in an increase in air quality or GHG emissions).
The proposed project includes Project Design Features (PDFs) that effectively reduce air quality and
GHG emissions. The PDFs are a combination of site design elements and operational programs that
include: pedestrian connections, mixture of land uses, connectivity design elements, commute trip
reduction program, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles,
compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards, compliance with SCAQMD Rule 445, on-site photovoltaic
electricity supply (15%), and waste diversion per AB 939. These PDFs were created specifically for the
operations of the proposed project and will be enforceable by the City pursuant to the terms of the
Development Agreement. Some PDFs are deemed applicable to alternatives and others are deemed
not applicable, 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 5, the applicable PDFs assumed to be incorporated are pedestrian connections, mixture of
land uses, connectivity design elements, compliance with Title 24 standards, compliance with
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-6 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
SCAQMD Rule 445, and waste diversion per AB 939. Alternatives 2 through 5 are assumed to not
include commute trip reduction programs, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-
sponsored shuttles, or on-site photovoltaic electricity supply (15%). As a result, Alternatives 2 through
5 are assumed to achieve a portion of the reductions in criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions
compared to the reductions attained by implementing the PDFs under the proposed project.
The project -specific Greenhouse Gas Report (Appendix 1) utilized CaIEEMod to analyze the GHG
emissions generated by construction and operation of the proposed project. The rates provided by
CaIEEMod, as well as the numbers generated by the Greenhouse Gas Report, were referenced when
determining the electricity and natural gas consumption of the alternatives. For example, the
numbers generated by CaIEEMod for the proposed project were reduced by one-third in order to
determine how much electricity and natural gas Alternative 3, the Reduced Density Alternative, would
consume. The electricity and natural gas demand for each alternative is provided in Appendix 0.
It was assumed that the daily trips generated by each alternative would correlate with the amount of
petroleum fuel used for vehicles. For example, if an alternative generated more daily trips than the
proposed project, it was assumed that that alternative would also result in greater petroleum
consumption as compared to the project. Daily trips used in this analysis are provided in Appendix N.
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), providing the square-footages
of each use, and the percentage of landscaped area associated with the use. These features, as well
as factors established by CVWD, then determine the indoor and outdoor water demand (acre-feet
year) of each alternative. Please consult Appendix 0, and the discussions below, for the findings.
7.4.1 Alternative 1— No Project/No Build
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 (e) the analysis of alternatives must include the specific
alternative of "No Project." The purpose of describing and analyzing a No Project alternative is to
allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of
not approving the proposed project. Under the No Project/No Build Alternative ("Alternative 1"), the
project would remain in its current and existing vacant condition. The existing visual character and
visual resources would remain the same, and none of the significant impacts of the project would
occur. However, the project site remaining in its existing condition is not considered the most likely
outcome if the proposed project is not approved, due to the existing entitlements, which allow
development of up to 750 residences, a golf course, and related improvements, as well as the fact
that the site is largely surrounded by existing development and supporting infrastructure, which
further facilitates development of the site. Accordingly, this Alternative will be disclosed and
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-7 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
discussed briefly in the Draft EIR, but it will not be analyzed in detail. A comparative analysis of impacts
for Alternative 1 is provided below:
Aesthetics
Under the No Project/No Build Alternative, the visual character of the project site, which is currently
characterized by vacant land, would remain the same. The views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the
south and Coral Mountain to the west would remain largely unobstructed, since development would
not occur onsite. However, existing man-made structures, landscaping, residential homes, and public
facilities currently partially obstruct the views of these landscapes when viewed from offsite areas
(including residential neighborhoods and public streets). Alternative 1 does not propose development
on the project site, therefore, the existing scenic vista would not change as a result of the No
Project/No Build Alternative. Therefore, Alternative 1 would not substantially impact the existing
visual character or scenic vista.
Compared to the project, Alternative 1 would result in less impacts to aesthetic resources, such as
scenic vistas, scenic resources, and light and glare, since the No Project/No Build Alternative would
not result in development of the project site. Alternative 1 would result in no impacts. Alternative 1
would eliminate the significant impacts to scenic vistas resulting from the project. The less than
significant impacts associated with scenic quality and light and glare would not occur under
Alternative 1. None of the lighting resulting from the proposed project, including the 80 -foot light
fixtures proposed for the illumination of the Wave Basin would occur under this alternative.
Alternative 1 would not increase lighting in the area, and Alternative 1 would have no impact on
aesthetics.
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.
Biological Resources
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. Vegetation within the project area is best
described as Desert Saltbush scrub, Tamarisk scrub, and Mesquite Hummock (CVMSHCP 2007). Land
is disturbed in the southern and northeast portions of the study area and a stand of blue palo verde
is present in the eastern portion of the study area. Dominant species include fourwind saltbush, bush
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-8 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
seepweed, athel, and common Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus). A majority of the project
area was previously utilized as agricultural land. As a result, the Desert Saltbrush scrub is fairly
disturbed throughout the study area.
Under Alternative 1, the project would remain in its current condition. Alternative 1 would avoid
construction of the project site, therefore, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not result in
impacts to biological resources.
Per the conclusions in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, the development of the proposed project
may result in impacts to biological resources. However, these impacts would be mitigated to less than
significant levels. Although the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to
biological resources with the implementation of mitigation measures, Alternative 1 would avoid
impacts associated with potential disturbance to these resources altogether and would therefore
have less of an impact compared to the proposed project. However, neither Alternative 1 nor the
proposed project would result in any significant and unavoidable impacts.
Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 1, the project would primarily remain in its current condition. Alternative 1 would
avoid construction of the project site, therefore, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not result
in impacts to cultural resources. Under Alternative 1, the known cultural resources on the property
would remain undisturbed, and the adobe structure that was part of the previous farm would
continue to deteriorate. In addition, the pre -historic resources (tribal rock art panels) at the base of
Coral Mountain would remain accessible to the public and would likely be subject to additional
vandalism.
Per the conclusions in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR, the development of the
proposed project may result in impacts to cultural resources. However, these impacts would 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 impacts associated with potential disturbance to buried cultural resources altogether,
but would potentially result in the loss of a historic adobe structure and further damage to the pre-
historic tribal cultural resources at the base of Coral Mountain. Therefore, although Alternative 1
would have no impacts on buried archaeological resources, it could result in significant impacts to
historic and pre -historic resources. Unlike the project and the build alternatives described below,
there would be no potential to mitigate this loss, and the potential impacts to historic and pre -historic
resources would be significant and unavoidable.
Energy Resources
Consumption of energy would not occur at the project property under Alternative 1 since this
Alternative does not propose development. The project site would remain undeveloped, and energy
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-9 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
consumption that typically occurs during construction and operational activities would not occur at
the site. Alternative 1 would result in no impacts to energy resources. Compared to the proposed
project, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in reduced impacts to energy resources.
Geology and Soils
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. The site would remain in the same condition
under Alternative 1. The site 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 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
site is anticipated with the No Project/No Build Alternative. Alternative 1 would not result in impacts
to geology and soils. Compared to Alternative 1, the proposed project would result in increased
impacts to geology and soils; however, these impacts are mitigable to less than significant levels.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Alternative 1 would result in no greenhouse gas emissions since no land development disturbance,
construction or operation would occur on the property. The current greenhouse gas reduction
policies applicable at the regional and state level toward addressing climate change would remain
unaffected by this Alternative. Compared to the proposed project, greenhouse gas emissions under
this Alternative would be effectively null.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Alternative 1 would not introduce any potentially new hazardous materials related to construction
activities or operation, and the use of hazardous materials would not occur during construction or
operation of the site.
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. The
proposed project would implement safety procedures when using, handling, or storing hazardous
materials to ensure less than significant impacts. Compared to the proposed project, impacts to
hazards and hazardous materials would be reduced in Alternative 1, but neither would cause a
significant and unavoidable impact.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Under Alternative 1, the property would maintain its current undeveloped condition without resulting
in any physical changes. West of Madison Street, two existing retention basins are designed to accept
stormwater sheet flow runoff from an eastern part of the site and from off-site street runoff
attributed to a portion of Madison Street. These basins would continue to accept on- and off-site
flows. The combined capacity of these basin facilities is approximately 7.9 acre-feet (344,000 cubic
feet). There are no mapped flood zone designations or reoccurring flood concerns associated with
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-10 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
the project site. Therefore, the regulatory permits pertaining to hydrology and water quality would
not be applicable. Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 1 would not result in measurable
impacts to hydrology, waste discharge requirements, groundwater management, flooding, erosion,
siltation or other relevant aspects of water quality.
Land Use and Planning
The project property is currently designated for Low Density Residential, Open Space Recreational,
and General Commercial land uses, as established by the City of La Quinta. The current zoning
designations for the project property is Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), Neighborhood
Commercial (CN), and Open Space (OS). Under Alternative 1, the project would remain in its current
vacant state. Alternative 1 would not be consistent with the City's land use and planning goals for the
property, insofar as the land has been planned for residential and golf course development since its
annexation to the City.
The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment, a Change of Zone, a new Specific Plan, a
Specific Plan Amendment, as well as a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Permit(s), and
Development Agreement to allow the development of a mix of uses including residential, resort,
commercial, and recreational uses on 386 acres. As determined in Section 4.10, Land Use and
Planning, these entitlements would not result in any conflicts with or significant impacts to any land
use plan, policy or regulation. Although the proposed project changes land use designations,
Alternative 1 does not implement the General Plan, in terms of long term vision for the City.
Noise
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. In its existing condition, the property does not
contribute to the existing ambient noise environment. Since the No Project/No Build Alternative does
not propose development of the property, this Alternative would not degrade the noise environment.
Construction and operational noise under the project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts,
with the implementation of mitigation measures. However, compared to the proposed project, the
No Project/No Build Alternative would produce no noise impacts.
Public Services
Under Alternative 1, the project site would not introduce residents, or uses that would place
additional burden on the City of La Quinta's public services. There would not be an increased demand
in police, fire, and emergency services, or schools, public facilities, and parks.
Alternative 1 would result in no impacts to public services compared to the proposed project.
However, the project will result in less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation
measures. Neither scenarios would result in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Transportation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-11 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
The No Project/No Build Alternative would not result in any increase of transportation or traffic since
Alternative 1 does not propose development on the property.
In comparison to the proposed project, Alternative 1 would not result in impacts related to vehicle
traffic during construction and operational activities. It should be noted, however, that under
Alternative 1, the proposed neighborhood serving commercial development would not be
constructed, and existing residents in the area would continue to be required to travel further for
typical neighborhood commercial goods, thereby continuing the relatively elevated VMTs in south La
Quinta.
An increase in operational traffic would also be less than significant with development of the
proposed project. Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 1 would not result in impacts since
the No Project/No Build Alternative would not develop the property and would not include an
increased density or a substantial amount of additional vehicle trips. Neither project would result in
significant and unavoidable impacts.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 1, the property would not impact tribal cultural resources, and tribal consultation
would not be required since the No Project/No Build Alternative does not propose development on
the project site.
As determined in Section 4.14, Tribal Cultural Resources, the proposed project would require
mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to less than significant levels. Alternative 1 would
avoid impacts associated with potential disturbance to tribal cultural resources and would therefore
have less of an impact compared to the proposed project. However, neither Alternative 1 nor the
proposed project have significant and unavoidable tribal cultural impacts.
Utilities and Service Systems
Under Alternative 1, the project would remain in its current undeveloped and vacant condition and
would result in no impacts to utilities regarding water service and supply, wastewater collection and
treatment, solid waste, energy, and telecommunications. Since the No Project/No Build Alternative
does not propose development of the 386 -acre project site, this Alternative would result in less
impacts to utilities compared to the proposed project. However, neither scenario would have a
significant impact on these systems.
Water
Water supply would not be required for Alternative 1. However, the proposed project would require
water services from the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). An increase in water demand may
be required during the construction and operation of the proposed project's uses; however, this
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-12 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
increased water demand would be consistent with its planned growth for the area. Both Alternative
1 and the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to water services.
Wastewater
Wastewater supply would not be required for Alternative 1. However, the proposed project would
require wastewater services from the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). An increase in
wastewater demand may be required during operation of the proposed project's uses; however, this
increased demand would be less than significant. Both Alternative 1 and the proposed project would
result in less than significant impacts to wastewater services.
Solid Waste
Alternative 1 would not require solid waste services and there would be no impacts. Compared to
Alternative 1, the proposed project would generate more solid waste, but the impact for the project
would be considered less than significant.
Electricity
Electricity would not be required for Alternative 1. Alternative 1 would result in no impacts to
electrical services.
The proposed project would be required to connect to an existing IID substation to provide electricity
to the project site. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
project shall be installed underground. The increase of electrical demand for the proposed project
would be supported by the proposed infrastructure. Alternative 1 would have no impact on electrical
demand, but the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts.
Natural Gas
Natural gas would not be required for Alternative 1. Alternative 1 would result in no impacts to natural
gas services.
The proposed project would be required to connect to existing Southern California Gas Company
infrastructure to provide natural gas to the project site. Additional natural gas infrastructure is not
required for the proposed project. Alternative 1 would have no impact on natural gas demand, but
the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts.
Telecommunications
Telecommunication services would not be required for Alternative 1, and there would be no impacts
to telecommunication services.
The proposed project would be required to connect to existing infrastructure, either by Frontier or
Spectrum to provide telecommunication services to the project site. Additional infrastructure is not
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-13 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
required for the proposed project. Alternative 1 would have no impact on telecommunications, but
the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts.
Summary of Comparative Impacts
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives is provided in Table 7-6,
Comparison of Alternatives to Project. The No Project/No Build Alternative would not result in
impacts to the project site since the Alternative does not propose development onsite. As described
above, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in reduced impacts associated with
construction and operation related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, energy resources,
geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water
quality, noise, public services, transportation, and utilities, compared to the proposed project.
However, Alternative 1 could result in the loss of the adobe structure and would leave the pre -historic
resources at the base of Coral Mountain unprotected, which would be considered a significant and
unavoidable impact to historic and pre -historic resources. In addition, Alternative 1 would not
implement the General Plan's land uses for the property, which could represent a significant impact
on City land use policy and its vision.
Relationship to Project Objectives
While most potentially significant impacts would be avoided with the No Project Alternative, the
following project objectives would not be achieved with Alternative 1:
• To implement a plan that recognizes and responds to the natural and aesthetic character of
the property.
• To create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales
tax revenues in order to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
• To promote walkability and non -motorized connectivity as an integral part of the project
design, including (1) establishing residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use
paths that connect neighborhoods throughout the project; and (2) providing "walk streets" in
the Resort area to provide internal connection between facilities within the Resort and the
Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
• Provide a variety of open space and recreational uses (active and passive).
• Design a planned community that complements existing development in the surrounding area
and is compatible with the surrounding environment.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-14 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
7.4.2 Alternative 2 — No Project/Existing Entitlements
Under the No Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative ("Alternative 2"), the site would be developed
according to its existing entitlements. Currently, the existing land use designations under SP 03-067
are General Commercial, Low Density Residential, and Open Space (Recreation). The existing zoning
designations are Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Low Density Residential (RL), and Golf Course (GC).
Under SP 03-067 the property would develop approximately 8.4 acres of commercial use, 204.2 acres
of low-density residential uses, and 171.9 acres for golf course use. This is indicated in the table,
below.
Table 7-1 Existing Land Use and Zoning Summary
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning
Acres
Square
Feet
Max.
Units
General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
8.4
60,000
--
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential (RL)
204.2
--
750
Open Space (Recreation)
Golf Course (GC)
171.9
--
--
Total
384.5
60,000
750
Under SP 03-067, implementation of Alternative 2 would include the development of 750 low density
residential units, 171.9 acres of golf use, and 8.4 acres, and up to 60,000 square feet of commercial
uses at the northeast corner of the property. It is anticipated that the golf course would be privately
owned and would be operated as a resort -style course that is available to the public to play on a daily
fee basis to ensure economic viability. Alternative 2 may include increased impacts involving traffic,
air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions due to its greater accessibility to the public. A comparative
analysis of impacts for Alternative 2 is provided below.
Aesthetics
Under the No Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative, impacts to the surrounding scenic vistas and
visual character would be similar to the proposed project, but would be somewhat reduced because
this Alternative would not include the resort and Wave Basin uses which, although limited in scale,
are considered a more intense land use than a golf course. Design features of the No Project/Existing
Entitlements Alternative, including architecture, landscaping, and development standards are all
required to adhere to the design guidelines in the exiting Specific Plan. Alternative 2 proposes a low
density residential and golf community consistent with the existing uses in the surrounding area.
Therefore, the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in less than significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-15 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
impacts to visual character due to Alternative 2's consistency with the surrounding context and SP
03-067.
Similar to Alternative 2, the project proposes commercial uses in the northeast corner of the site, and
low density residential units. However, the project also proposes a resort hotel, resort commercial
buildings, and recreational uses (including an artificial Wave Basin feature), instead of the golf course
proposed in Alternative 2. The development of the proposed project would introduce increased
building and structure heights, as well as seventeen, 80 -foot light fixtures surrounding the Wave
Basin, which would not occur in Alternative 2. As determined in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, some
locations along the public rights -of -ways, where the scenic vistas are most likely to be viewed, provide
unobstructed views of Coral Mountain. Development of the perimeter block wall and residential
homes, as well as perimeter landscaping which would be expected to occur under Alternative 2 may
result in partially obstructed views of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and complete obstruction of Coral
Mountain at the same locations as described for the proposed project, since the blockage occurs as a
result of the construction of perimeter walls and houses. Homes built under Alternative 2 will comply
with Section 9.50.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, which limits building heights to 22 feet, if
located within 150 feet of an image corridor (i.e., Avenue 58 and Madison Street). The development
of Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to scenic vistas as the proposed project because it
would also include the construction of perimeter walls, landscaping and homes along the perimeter
roadways. Alternative 2 would be required to adhere to the design standards within the existing
Specific Plan. Consistent with the proposed project, impacts of the perimeter improvements and
homes to scenic vistas of Coral Mountain would be significant. The additional mitigation provided for
the proposed project under AES -1 and AES -2 would not occur, because the approved Specific Plan
allows development within these setbacks. However, consistent with the results of these mitigation
measures for the proposed project, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as it relates to
views of Coral Mountain from certain viewpoints on Avenue 58 and Madison Street. Views of the
Santa Rosas would be partially obstructed consistent with the obstruction created by the proposed
project, because residential structures would be similar in size and mass to the residential structures
proposed for the project, and the mid-range and ridgelines of the Santa Rosas would generally remain
visible.
Because no Wave Basin would occur under Alternative 2, there would be no over -height light poles
under Alternative 2. Lighting would occur, however, consistent with the requirements of the Specific
Plan and the Municipal Code, including commercial lighting at the neighborhood shopping center at
the northeast corner, and residential and safety lighting at the homes and golf course. The lighting
would, however, be expected to conform to Municipal Code standards, be shielded and low intensity,
and not emit light beyond the property line. Lighting would not require mitigation, and impacts would
remain less than significant, and less than for the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-16 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Although, Alternative 2 would result in reduced impacts compared to the project, both scenarios
would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to existing views of scenic vistas. Alternative 2
would have less than significant impacts on visual character, consistent with the proposed project,
and lower impacts on light and glare than the proposed project.
Air Quality
Implementation of Alternative 2 would entail construction and operation under the existing
entitlements, resulting in 8.4 acres of neighborhood commercial, 750 low density residential units,
171.9 acres of golf course development. Construction impacts associated with Alternative 2 would be
similar to those analyzed under the proposed project, because the same area would be disturbed,
and the entire site would be developed.
Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB)'s Draft 2020 Mobile Source Strategy, traffic -
related mobile sources contribute a majority of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-2, provided under
the Transportation discussion for this alternative, Alternative 2 is expected to generate 13% more
trips compared to the proposed project due to the increased number of single-family residential
dwelling units and the lack of internal relationships to services and activities associated with the
proposed project. This Alternative would have reduced emissions associated with the production of
electricity and water, because it would not include a Wave Basin, and the need for electricity
associated with that feature. Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear in
the CaIEEMod model, Alternative 2 would result in elevated emissions associated with vehicle trips.
Given that under proposed project conditions, the emissions associated with NOx, which are directly
influenced by vehicle emissions, would be below but close to significance thresholds, Alternative 2
would be expected to have significant NOx emissions, and to require mitigation. As with the proposed
project, VOC emissions would also be expected to exceed significance thresholds, and mitigation
would be required. For the proposed project, PDFs and mitigation resulted in an average reduction of
12% to 15% in criteria air pollutant emissions. Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 2 is
expected to achieve a lower reduction in criteria air pollutant emissions from PDF implementation
because Alternative 2 cannot be assumed to include commute trip reduction programs,
telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles, on-site photovoltaic
electricity supply as PDFs because they would require applicant agreement (the other PDFs were
assumed to be included in Alternative 2). Overall, therefore, impacts associated with Alternative 2
would be greater than the proposed project for operations, and equivalent to the proposed project
for construction.
Biological Resources
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-17 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Under Alternative 2, impacts to biological resources would be similar to the proposed project,
because the same area of land would be disturbed.
As established in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, development of the 386 -acre property would
impact onsite biological resources, therefore, mitigation is recommended to reduce the impacts to
less than significant levels. The mitigation measures require burrowing owl and bat surveys to be
conducted prior to construction, and vegetation removal activities to occur outside of the general
bird nesting season (January 15 through August 31), unless nesting bird surveys are completed. The
mitigation measures would also be imposed for development of Alternative 2 to reduce impacts to
biological resources to less than significant levels.
Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to biological
resources since both scenarios would result in development of the 386 -acre property. However,
neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed project result in any significant and unavoidable impacts to
biological resources.
Cultural Resources
Per the conclusions in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, the development of the 386 -acre site may
result in impacts to cultural resources. Since both Alternative 2 and the proposed project would result
in development of the 386 -acre site, both scenarios would be required to implement the mitigation
measures established in Section 4.4. In order to reduce impacts to less than significant levels
Alternative 2 would be required to develop a comprehensive recordation program prepared by a
qualified archaeologist; retain a qualified archaeologist during all project -related ground disturbing
activities; hire an approved Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) Native American Cultural
Resource Monitor during any ground disturbing activities; implement cultural sensitivity training for
all contractors; establish protected easements and National Register nominations; preserve the
historic adobe and avoid the known archaeological sites along the base of Coral Mountain. The
implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure impacts to cultural resources are
reduced to less than significant levels.
Both the proposed project and Alternative 2 would mitigate impacts associated with potential
disturbance to cultural resources. Compared to the proposed project, the No Project/Existing
Entitlements Alternative would result in similar impacts to cultural resources. However, neither
Alternative 2 nor the proposed project would result in any significant and unavoidable cultural
impacts.
Energy
Due to the undeveloped and vacant nature of the site, the 386 -acre site does not currently consume
energy resources and electricity and natural gas facilities are not currently provided to the site.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-18 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Development and operation of the No Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative would result in an
increase of energy consumption at the site.
Construction
Short-term energy consumption related to construction activities would be similar during
development of both Alternative 2 and the proposed project. 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 machinery, large equipment, and employee vehicle trips. Natural gas would not be
required during construction activities. However, as determined in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, the
use of electricity and petroleum under Alternative 2 would not be excessive, or unnecessary, and
would cease at the conclusion of construction, because construction activities would be similar to the
proposed project.
Operation
The operation of the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in reduced energy
demand (via electricity and natural gas) as compared to the proposed project. Alternative 2 would
not result in the development of the tourist commercial portion of the site, which includes the Wave
Basin, associated light fixtures, hotel uses, and ancillary resort commercial uses. The removal of these
uses from Alternative 2 would result in reduced energy consumption compared to the proposed
project. The Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
Comparison, provided by Urban Crossroads, determined that Alternative 2 would result in more
vehicle trips, compared to the proposed project. The increased petroleum consumption would be
proportional to the increase in daily trips. Therefore, the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative
would result in greater consumption of petroleum fuel than the proposed project.
The proposed Coral Mountain Resort development would be required to connect to an existing IID
substation (offsite). The substation connection would be developed during phase 1 of project
construction. As determined in Section 4.5, the connection to the substation would not result in
excessive, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of electricity. Given the presence of the residential
and commercial components under Alternative 2, it is likely that the same improvements to the IID
substation required under the proposed project would be required.
Alternative 2 would require 5,071,006-kiloWatt hour (kWh) in electric power, and 13,182,066.5
thousand British thermal units (kBTU) in natural gas annually. Electricity and natural gas consumed
by Alternative 2 would be reduced by 41 percent and 40 percent, respectively, as compared to the
proposed project, as a result of replacing the resort uses included in the proposed project with more
single-family homes and a golf course. However, due to the increased vehicle trips associated with
the 750 residential units, Alternative 2 would result in increased petroleum consumption compared
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-19 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
to proposed project. However, both the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative and the proposed
project would not result in excessive, wasteful, or unnecessary energy consumption, as determined
in Section 4.5. Development and operation of the proposed project or Alternative 2 would not result
in significant impacts regarding energy resources.
Geology and Soils
Under Alternative 2, the site would develop 750 low density residential dwelling units on 204.2 acres,
general commercial uses on 8.4 acres, and a golf course on 171.9 acres. The golf course would be
located adjacent to Coral Mountain and act as an open space buffer separating the proposed
habitable structures from the Mountain's slopes in the No Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative.
As determined in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, the site is not located near an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake fault zone.
The same mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applied to Alternative 2
to address impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking, seismic -related ground failure,
ground subsidence, collapsible soils, corrosive soils, and paleontological resources, thereby reducing
impacts to less than significant levels. Development of the property would be required to comply with
the recommendations provided in the site-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix G) to ensure
the onsite soils can support the proposed foundations and structures. Additionally, the property
would be required to retain a qualified paleontological monitor during all earth -moving operations
reaching beyond the depth of two feet.
Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to geology and soils as the proposed project, and both
scenarios will be required to implement mitigation measures. The No Project/Existing Entitlement
Alternative does not propose the development of the Wave Basin facility; however, it is likely that
Alternative 2 would introduce lakes throughout the golf course area for retention and aesthetic
purposes. These features are typical for golf courses, and would be required to comply with seismic
standards for construction.
The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in similar impacts to geology and soils
at the 386 -acre site, compared to the proposed project, and neither would result in significant and
unavoidable impacts.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Implementation of Alternative 2 would entail construction and operation under the existing
entitlements, resulting in 8.4 acres of neighborhood commercial, 750 low density residential units,
171.9 acres of golf course development. Construction impacts associated with Alternative 2 would be
similar to those analyzed under the proposed project, because the same area would be disturbed,
and the entire site would be developed.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-20 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB)'s Draft 2020 Mobile Source Strategy, traffic -
related mobile sources contribute a majority of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.
As shown in Table 7-2 provided under the Transportation discussion for this Alternative, Alternative
2 is expected to generate 13% more trips compared to the proposed project due to the increased
number of single-family residential dwelling units and the lack of internal relationships to services and
activities associated with the proposed project. This alternative would have reduced criteria air
pollutant and GHG emissions associated with the production of electricity and water, because it
would not include a wave basin, and the need for electricity associated with that feature. Although
air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear in the CaIEEMod model, Alternative 2 would
result in elevated GHG emissions associated with vehicle trips. For the proposed project, PDFs
resulted in a GHG emissions reduction of approximately 30%. Compared to the proposed project,
Alternative 2 is expected to achieve a lower reduction in GHG emissions from PDF implementation
because Alternatives 2 cannot be assumed to include commute trip reduction programs,
telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles, on-site photovoltaic
electricity supply (the other PDFs were assumed to be included in Alternative 2). Overall, therefore,
GHG impacts associated with Alternative 2 would be greater than the proposed project for
operations, and equivalent to the proposed project for construction.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Under Alternative 2, the property would develop 750 low density residential units on 204.2 acres, a
golf course on 171.9 acres, and commercial land uses on 8.4 acres. The nature of the uses proposed
under Alternative 2 is not expected to involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials in quantities or a manner that would pose a threat to the project and its surroundings or
create a significant hazard through a foreseeable accident condition.
Construction
Construction of Alternative 2 is expected to involve the temporary management and use of oils, fuels
and other potentially flammable substances in a manner similar to the proposed project. Hazardous
materials would be delivered, stored, and handled to manufacturer instructions and industry
standards. Additionally, the contractor will be required to identify a controlled staging area within the
project limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP). The handling of potentially hazardous materials on-site would still to occur. Similar to
the proposed project, the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would implement safety
procedures when using, handling, storing hazardous materials and impacts would be less than
significant.
Operation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-21 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Common hazardous materials utilized during the operation of residential, commercial, and golf uses
can include everyday commercial products, such as pesticides, cleaning fluids, and household sprays.
The golf course could result in the use and storage of larger amounts of pesticides and fertilizers as
well as the maintenance of golf carts and other equipment used onsite than the proposed project,
but these amounts would not be expected to be any greater than currently used and stored
throughout the City's golf courses, nor are they expected to create any significant hazard. Hazardous
materials during operation of the site would be delivered, stored, and handled to manufacturer
instructions and industry standards. 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. The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would implement safety procedures
when using, handling, storing hazardous materials and impacts would be less than significant.
If Alternative 2 were to store hazardous materials in quantities greater than 55 gallons of liquid, 500
pounds of solid, and 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, the applicant would be required to submit a
Hazardous Materials Business Plan to the Riverside County Fire Department.
Comparatively, the proposed project would be required to comply with Section 65529 of Title 22 of
the California Code of Regulations (CCR) regarding Public Pool Disinfection. The operation of the Wave
Basin and the resort pools would be required to comply with CCR standards to ensure that the public
facilities are disinfected, and the chemicals are stored to State standards.
As determined in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the site is not located within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, therefore, neither scenario would result in significant
impacts to a school facility.
Construction and operation of the 386 -acre site, under Alternative 2 will marginally increase vehicular
and multi -modal transportation along the local major roadways in the City. Primary access to the site
would be expected to occur along Madison Street, with access to the commercial portion of the site
from both Madison Street and Avenue 58. These roadways will provide public and emergency access
in to and out of the project property. As with the proposed project, no alteration to existing
emergency evacuation routes would be proposed.
As with the proposed project, a Traffic Control Plan will be required as a condition of approval to be
implemented throughout all construction activities. This plan will reduce potential impacts that may
arise due to conflicts with construction traffic. Project access points would be reviewed by the Fire
Department, to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles.
Finally, the property is not located in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(VHFHSZ) according to CALFIRE's High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsible Areas Map.
Therefore, impacts of exposing people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires are
expected to be less than significant for both the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative and the
proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-22 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Compared to the proposed project, the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in
similar, less than significant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. Neither scenario would
result in significant or unavoidable impacts.
Hydrology and Water Quality
The disturbed area associated with Alternative 2 would be the same as the 386 -acre disturbance by
the proposed project. Engineering design for Alternative 2 would be required to comply with City
standards for the on-site retention of storm flows during the 100 year storm, and would be expected
to design retention basins, lakes and similar facilities to those proposed for the project. 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 irrigate the 18 -hole golf course than will be used for the
Wave Basin and other recreational amenities included in the proposed project; however, this increase
in water demands is not expected to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with
groundwater recharge. Therefore, after following the regulatory program requirements designed
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
The project site is currently located within the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067)
area. Under SP -03-067, the land use designations for the property include Low Density Residential,
Open Space Recreational, and General Commercial land uses, and the zoning designations for the
project include Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), and Neighborhood Commercial (CN).
The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would implement SP 03-067, would not require a
General Plan Amendment or Zone Change, and would not result in impacts to land use or planning
since the site is currently designated for the residential, commercial, and golf uses.
Under Alternative 2, there would be no changes in existing land use conditions, or conflicts with any
land use plan, policy, or regulation. Additionally, this Alternative would not divide an established
community. No impacts would occur.
Neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed project would have a significant impact, or unavoidable
impacts on land use, but because Alternative 2 will not require a General Plan Amendment, Change
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-23 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
of Zone, Specific Plan Amendment, or a new Specific Plan it will have lower land use and planning
impacts than the proposed project.
Noise
The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in the development and operation of
the site, therefore, resulting in an increase in the noise environment.
Construction
Construction of Alternative 2 would increase the ambient noise level at and surrounding the site in a
manner similar to the proposed project, since the entire site would be developed. As with the
proposed project, construction activities are limited to daytime hours by Section 6.08.050 of the La
Quinta Municipal Code. Construction would not occur outside of these hours. Given the similar levels
of development, noise levels during construction would be expected to be less than significant. The
same mitigation measures, including utilizing construction equipment equipped with properly
operating and maintained mufflers, and locating equipment staging in areas separated from noise -
sensitive receivers could also be applied to Alternative 2. Construction noise would contribute a short-
term impact and would cease once construction has ended. Both scenarios would result in similar
noise impacts during construction of the site.
Operation
Operational noise from Alternative 2 is not anticipated to be significant since the No Project/Existing
Entitlement Alternative proposes uses similar to those in the surrounding area, which consist of
residential and golf communities. Alternative 2 would not include a hotel, resort commercial or Wave
Basin, which generate noise levels determined to be less than significant for the proposed project.
Because these uses would not be present, however, on-site noise levels would be lower under this
Alternative.
The operation of Alternative 2 could include special events held on the golf course, but these events
are not expected to cause significant noise impacts. Alternative 2 would result in a higher number of
vehicle trips on City roadways than the proposed project. Those trips would also marginally increase
the levels of noise on these roadways, but given existing capacity and the dispersed nature of the
trips, impacts would not be expected to be significant.
Overall, the noise generated by Alternative 2 would result in reduced on-site impacts as compared to
the proposed project. However, neither the proposed project nor Alternative 2 would result in
significant and unavoidable operational noise impacts.
Public Services
The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative project would introduce residents and uses that
would increase demand on the City of La Quinta's public services. There would be an increased
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-24 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
demand in police, fire, and emergency services, as well as schools, public facilities, and parks as a
result of the development of the proposed 750 low density residential units. However, Alternative 2
would be required to comply with applicable laws and codes imposed by the City and Riverside County
Fire Department, and would pay applicable Development Impact Fees. Impacts will be less than
significant.
Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to public services as the proposed project. However,
neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Transportation
Short-term construction vehicle trip impacts would result from the development of the residential
homes and golf course. A Traffic Control Plan will be required as a condition of approval to be
implemented throughout all construction activities. However, these impacts would be generally
limited to permitted construction activity hours per the La Quinta Municipal Code. Additionally,
construction traffic would cease once construction of the facilities were complete. Primary access to
the site will occur along Avenue 58, and Madison Street, and secondary access from Avenue 60. These
roadways will provide public and emergency access in to and out of the project property.
Alternative 2 operations would result in an increase of transportation/traffic in the project area, as
shown in Table 7-2 below.
Table 7-2 Alternative 2 Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Alternative 2 Trip Generation Comparison
Proposed Project (TIA)
-496 DU SFDR, 104 DU MF, 150 RM Hotel, 60 TSF Retail. 12 AC Wave Basin
Facility, 15 TSF Wave Village, 16 TSF The Farm
147
300
447
383
255
638
6,994
No Project/Existing Alternatives
-750 DU SFDR, 60 TSF Retail, 18 Hole Golf Course
175
414
589
505
324
829
7,923
Alternative 2 Delta (Alternative — TIA)
28
114
142
122
69
191
929
Operation of Alternative 2 would increase on- and off-site vehicle trips by approximately 13 percent
from residents and golfers because the mix of uses under this Alternative will have more single-family
homes and less overall internal trip capture, and thus will generate more daily trips leaving the project
site.
Given the 13% projected increase in vehicle trips generated by this Alternative, intersections with
vehicle delay thresholds near levels of significance could potentially be increased by Alternative 2
project traffic. For example, an intersection such as Madison Street and Avenue 50, which has a delay
of 54.8 (LOS D) with proposed project traffic volumes, could be increased to LOS E (delay of 55.0) with
the additional traffic volumes associated with Alternative 2. LOS is no longer a CEQA threshold,
however it is still utilized to determine consistency with the City's Circulation Element. Therefore, this
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-25 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Alternative could result in increased impacts at intersections, and additional improvements to
mitigate these impacts. As is the case with the proposed project, however, mitigation through the
payment of DIF fees and fair share contributions to planned improvements would be expected to
reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
This Alternative is anticipated to have a higher daily VMT and per capita VMT because it generates
more daily trips and lacks the complimentary mix of uses on-site and enhanced connectivity between
those uses which reduce per capita VMT. Alternative 2 is expected to generate 13% more trips
compared to the proposed project due to the increased number of single-family residential dwelling
units (+150 DU) and reduction in internal trip capture. The proposed 60,000 SF of commercial uses at
the corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street would continue to result in a reduction in trips due to
trip capture in Alternative 2, however the internal relationships to resort services and activities
associated with the proposed project compared to the internal capture of the golf course in
Alternative 2 would result in a reduction of internal trip capture. The proposed project would result
in approximately 35% (1413/4057) trip capture while Alternative 2 would result in approximately 16%
(1540/9892) trip capture. Alternative 2 residential access to resort activity/services included in the
proposed project would require longer trips to facilities outside of the surrounding neighborhood
environment. This would result in an overall higher VMT for Alternative 2. Impacts are anticipated to
be significant and unavoidable.
Alternative 2 would be expected to contribute to the improvement of the local roadway system,
similar to the proposed project. Overall, Alternative 2 would generate more daily trips on area
roadways, resulting in increased VMT impacts and potentially greater LOS impacts, compared to the
proposed project.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts to tribal cultural resources as the proposed project.
Additionally, both projects would be required to undergo tribal consultation with local tribes.
Alternative 2 would be required to implement the same measures as the proposed project to reduce
impacts to less than significant levels. However, neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed project have
any significant and unavoidable impacts to tribal cultural resources.
Utilities and Service Systems
Compared to the proposed project, the No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would result in an
increased demand for water to irrigate the golf course, but would decrease demand for electricity
and natural gas. The remaining utilities, including wastewater collection and treatment, solid waste,
and telecommunication services would be similar under this Alternative and the proposed project.
However, neither Alternative 2 nor the proposed project would cause any significant and unavoidable
impacts to concerning utilities.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-26 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Water
Water supply would be provided to the site by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). Alternative
2 would have similar demand for water during construction, as the same area would be disturbed.
Alternative 2 would result in an increase in water demand during operation of the proposed
residential, golf, and commercial uses. The existing entitled project assumes 750 homes, and
approximately 171.9 acres of golf. As determined in the Alternatives Water, Electricity, and Natural
Gas Comparisons Memo (Appendix 0), the existing land use designation would result in 1,058.54 AFY
of water consumption a year. This is an increase of 99.91 AFY compared to the proposed project,
which would consume 958.63 AFY.
CVWD established a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) of 962 AFY for outdoor
(landscaped) areas for the project property. For design purposes, the MAWA is the upper limit of
annual applied water for the established landscape area of a project. It is based upon the areas
reference evapotranspiration (ET) adjustment factor, and the size of the landscaped area. See Section
4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR. The outdoor water consumption for Alternative
2 is 921.14 AFY, and the proposed project is 801.47 AFY. Both Alternative 2 and the proposed project
comply with CVWD's MAWA, although the proposed project results in a lower MAWA, and lower
water demand than Alternative 2.
CVWD has a groundwater supply of 194,000 AFY. Water demand and supply under this Alternative
would still be reviewed by CVWD to determine if adequate service could be provided for the No
Project/Existing Entitlements Alternative. Alternative 2 could result in a water demand increase of
99.91 AFY, as compared to the proposed project. A new Water Supply Assessment would be required
for this alternative, but it would be expected, given CVWD's water supplies, that the WSA would find
that adequate supplies exist for the alternative project. Additional water lines would also be required,
consistent with the proposed project, to connect to water mains in surrounding streets, but these
would not be any greater than the lines required for the proposed project.
Although the impacts to water supply will be increased in Alternative 2, as compared to the proposed
project, neither project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Wastewater
Wastewater service would also be provided to the property by CVWD. Wastewater services required
for Alternative 2 would be similar to the proposed project. The sewage generated by the project
would be somewhat reduced when compared to the proposed project, due to the lack of resort
commercial development associated with this alternative, so sewage treatment capacity would be
sufficient to serve the alternative. Additional sewer lines would also be required, consistent with the
proposed project, to connect to sewer mains in surrounding streets, but these would not be any
greater than the lines required for the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-27 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Both projects would result in less than significant impacts, and neither scenario would result in
significant and unavoidable impacts.
Solid Waste
Burrtec would provide the property with solid waste services. The development of the No
Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would require solid waste services to remove waste
produced by construction activities. However, construction waste produced by Alternative 2 would
not be significant and would cease after the proposed facilities were developed.
Solid waste generated by Alternative 2 would be somewhat less than the waste generated by the
proposed project, because of the reduction in resort and resort commercial uses on the property.
Compared to Alternative 2, the proposed project would generate somewhat greater amounts of solid
waste, but impacts would be less than significant. Neither scenario would result in significant and
unavoidable impacts.
Electricity
Electricity would be required for construction and operation of Alternative 2. However, it is likely that
electricity consumed by Alternative 2 would be somewhat reduced, as compared to the proposed
project, as a result of replacing the resort uses and the Wave Basin included in the proposed project
with single-family homes and a golf course.
The proposed project would be required to connect to an existing IID substation to provide electricity
to the project site. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
project shall be installed underground. The increase of electrical demand for the proposed project
would be supported by the proposed infrastructure. Given the residential and commercial
development generated under Alternative 2, it is likely that the same improvements to the IID
substation required under the proposed project would be required. These improvements will provide
power for the proposed project and Alternative 2.
Both projects would result in less than significant impacts to electricity. Neither project would result
in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Natural Gas
Natural Gas, provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), would be required for the
operation of Alternative 2. However, it is likely that natural gas consumed by Alternative 2 would be
reduced as compared to the proposed project due to the absence of the resort uses.
The proposed project would be required to connect to existing SoCalGas infrastructure to provide
natural gas to the project site. Additional natural gas infrastructure is not required for the proposed
project, and would not be expected for Alternative 2. The increase of natural gas demand for the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-28 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
proposed project would be less than significant. Both projects would result in no significant and
unavoidable impacts.
Telecommunications
The No Project/Existing Entitlement Alternative would be required to connect to existing
telecommunication services. Both Alternative 2 and the proposed project would be required to
connect to existing infrastructure, either by Frontier or Spectrum, to provide telecommunication
services to the project site. Additional infrastructure would not be required. The increase of
telecommunication demand for the site would be less than significant for both scenarios.
Summary of Comparative Impacts
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives is provided in Table 7-6,
Comparison of Alternatives to Project. As described above, the No Project/Existing Entitlement
Alternative would result in similar, mitigatable impacts to the proposed project related to biological
resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, public
services, tribal cultural resources, and certain utilities (wastewater, solid waste, and
telecommunications). Impacts to aesthetics, energy resources (electricity and natural gas), geology
and soils, land use and planning, noise, and certain utilities (regarding gas and electricity) would be
reduced with Alternative 2. Impacts to air quality, energy resources (petroleum consumption),
greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, and certain utilities (water use) would be increased
compared to the proposed project since Alternative 2 would have more single-family homes, and the
golf course would be more accessible to the public and use more water than the recreational
amenities included in the proposed project. Alternative 2 would result in potentially significant
impacts to scenic vistas, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation (VMTs).
Relationship to Project Objectives
While some potentially significant impacts would be reduced with the No Project/Existing Entitlement
Alternative, the following project objectives would not be achieved with Alternative 2:
• To create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales
tax revenues in order to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
• To promote walkability and non -motorized connectivity as an integral part of the project
design, including (1) establishing residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use
trails that connect neighborhoods throughout the project; and (2) providing "walk streets" in
the Resort area to provide internal connection between facilities within the Resort and the
Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-29 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
• Design a planned community that complements existing development in the surrounding area
and is compatible with the surrounding environment.
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
7.4.3 Alternative 3 — Reduced Density
Under the Reduced Density Alternative ("Alternative 3"), the project density would be reduced by
one-third when compared to the proposed project. Therefore, this Reduced Density Alternative
would result in 400 residential dwelling units, 100 resort/hotel rooms, 38,000 square feet of resort
commercial uses, and 40,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses. The Wave Basin and
other proposed recreational amenities would remain part of the project as presently proposed. The
project would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, new
Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map(s) and Site Development Permits, similar to the proposed project.
This one-third reduction of the proposed uses is expected to reduce impacts compared to the
proposed project. A comparative analysis of impacts for Alternative 3 is provided below:
Aesthetics
Under the Reduced Density Alternative, impacts to the surrounding scenic vistas and aesthetic quality
of the area would be similar to the proposed project. Alternative 3, like the proposed project, would
be required to develop a new Specific Plan in order to include the proposed tourist commercial uses
onsite. The new Specific Plan would govern the proposed design standards and guidelines for the
project site. The design features and development standards proposed in Alternative 3 would be
subject to City review regarding architecture and design to ensure a high-quality design project.
Alternative 3 would be required to adhere to the development standards, design features,
architecture, and landscaping required in the new Specific Plan. It would be expected that
development under Alternative 3 would include the same increased building height for the hotel and
wave basin facilities, and the need for 80 -foot light poles.
Like the proposed project, the Reduced Density Alternative would impact existing scenic vistas, such
as Coral Mountain, west of the project, and the Santa Rosa Mountains, south of the project. When
viewed on the public rights-of-way (Avenue 58 to the north and Madison Street to the east) Coral
Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains are unobstructed by the property, due to its undeveloped
character. Development of Alternative 3 would result in impacts to existing views of Coral Mountain
and the Santa Rosa Mountains, depending on the viewpoint location consistent with those of the
proposed project, because perimeter walls and homes would occur. Some locations along the public
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-30 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
rights -of -ways, where the scenic vistas are most likely to be viewed, provide unobstructed views of
the Mountains, and development of the perimeter block wall and residential homes, as well as
perimeter landscaping, may result in partially obstructed views of the Mountains. However, as stated
in Section 4.1 and shown in the visual simulations contained therein, the impacts on existing views
depends on the location of the viewpoint, in conjunction with features along the project's frontage,
including the landscape (tree and canopy size) and the location of the residential structures and
rooftops. At some public locations surrounding the project site, such as a location east of the project
at the Andalusia entry, the project will impact views of Coral Mountain. However, if traveling along
Madison Street, these partially obstructed views of Coral Mountain are dependent on residential roof
location, and tree canopy size. Views of Coral Mountain are visible at other locations along Madison
Street, Avenue 58, and Avenue 60. Therefore, the proposed project and Alternative 3 will not
completely remove the views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains from public viewing
locations. To mitigate the impacts to these existing views to the maximum extent feasible, the project
and Alternative 3 would be required to implement Mitigation Measure AES -1, which requires the
perimeter walls to be setback from the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a
minimum average of 30 feet (10 feet more than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed
through the City's review and approval of final perimeter wall and landscape plans, and Mitigation
Measure AES -2, which requires a minimum setback of 75 feet between any residential structure and
the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way in order to reduce impacts to the scenic vistas
to the greatest extent feasible. However, even with the implementation of Mitigation Measures AES -
1 and AES -2, the impacts on scenic resources from both the project and Alternative 3 are considered
significant and unavoidable.
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts to light and glare, compared to the
proposed project, since both Alternative 3 and the proposed project would result in the development
and operation of residential, resort, commercial, and recreational uses, as well as the Wave Basin
facility. Located in Planning Area III (near the southwest portion of the site) operation of the Wave
Basin would include seventeen, 80 -foot light poles to illuminate the Basin from sunset to 10:00 p.m.
(per Mitigation Measure AES -3). As described in Section 4.1, the photometrics prepared for these
lights showed that the light and glare generated from the 80 -foot light fixtures will not impact offsite
properties. The properties adjacent to the Wave Basin would perceive up to one foot-candle, which
is equivalent to the light emitted during twilight. Glare will be perceived by the immediately adjacent
onsite properties, however these resort residential units are designed and intended to interact with
the Wave Basin and other resort uses, such that some light and glare spillage is deemed acceptable
for these units.
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts to the proposed project. However,
as determined in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, impacts to aesthetic resources could be mitigated to the
maximum extent feasible. However, both Alternative 3 and the proposed project would result in
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-31 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
significant and unavoidable impacts regarding impacts to existing views of scenic vistas. Impacts
associated with visual character would be similar and less than significant, and impacts associated
with light and glare would be less than significant under both Alternative 3 and the proposed project.
Air Quality
Implementation of Alternative 3 would entail construction and operation of a reduced density land
development scenario. Construction activities associated with Alternative 3 would disturb the entire
site for development, but would involve a shorter construction duration due to a reduced number of
dwelling units and retail floor areas compared to the proposed project. Therefore, based on a shorter
construction time frame with an associated reduced use of construction equipment and mobile
sources, construction -related emission impacts with Alternative 3 would be lower than those
analyzed under the proposed project.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-3, provided under
the Transportation discussion below, Alternative 3 is expected to generate 34% fewer trips compared
to the proposed project due to the reduced number of single-family residential dwelling units and
retail areas. Since this Alternative maintains the Wave Basin feature, it would have comparable
emissions from the production of electricity and water particularly associated with that feature.
Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear in the CaIEEMod model,
Alternative 3 would result in lower emissions associated with vehicle trips. Alternative 3 would be
expected to have proportionally lower and less than significant NOx and VOC emissions, which are
directly influenced by mobile sources. For the proposed project, PDFs and mitigation resulted in an
average reduction of 12% to 15% in criteria air pollutant emissions. Compared to the proposed
project, Alternative 3 is expected to achieve a lower reduction in criteria air pollutant emissions from
PDF implementation because Alternative 3 cannot be assumed to include commute trip reduction
programs, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles, on-site
photovoltaic electricity supply as PDFs (the other PDFs were assumed to be included in Alternative 3).
Overall, however, impacts associated with Alternative 3 would be lower than the proposed project
because of the reduced NOx emissions associated with vehicle trips, and less than significant for
construction and operations.
Biological Resources
Under Alternative 3, conditions to biological resources would be similar to the proposed project.
As established in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, development of the 386 -acre property would
impact onsite biological resources, therefore, mitigation consistent with that for the proposed project
would be required to reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The mitigation measures
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-32 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
require burrowing owl and bat surveys to be conducted prior to construction, and vegetation removal
activities to occur outside of the general bird nesting season (January 15 through August 31), or
following nesting bird surveys, whichever applies. With implementation of these measures, impacts
would be reduced to less than significant levels, and would be similar to the proposed project.
Cultural Resources
Per the conclusions in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, the development of the 386 -acre site may
result in impacts to cultural resources. Since both Alternative 3 and the proposed project would result
in development of the 386 -acre site, both scenarios would be required to implement the mitigation
measures established in Section 4.4. In order to reduce impacts to less than significant levels
Alternative 3 would be required to: develop a comprehensive recordation program prepared by a
qualified archaeologist; retain a qualified archaeologist during all project -related ground disturbing
activities; hire an approved Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) Native American Cultural
Resource Monitor during any ground disturbing activities; implement cultural sensitivity training for
all contractors; establish protected easements and National Register nominations; preserve the
historic adobe, and avoid the known archaeological sites along the base of Coral Mountain. The
implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure impacts to cultural resources are
reduced to less than significant levels.
Both the proposed project and Alternative 3 would avoid significant impacts associated with potential
disturbance to cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures.
Energy
Construction and operation of Alternative 3 would result in a reduced demand for energy resources
compared to the proposed project. Although both scenarios propose residential, tourist commercial,
neighborhood commercial, and recreational uses, Alternative 3 proposes a reduced density on the
site, developing two-thirds of the proposed project density. The Wave Basin facility would remain.
Therefore, operation of Alternative 3 would result in less consumption of energy resources compared
to the project.
Construction
Short-term energy consumption related to construction activities would occur during development
of both Alternative 3 and the proposed project. 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 machinery,
large equipment, and employee vehicle trips. Natural gas would not be required during construction
activities.
Compared to the project, Alternative 3 proposes reduced density and would result in reduced energy
consumed during construction of the site.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-33 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
As demonstrated in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, the use of electricity and petroleum during
construction of Alternative 3 would not be excessive, or unnecessary. Additionally, construction -
related energy consumption at the site would cease at the conclusion of construction. Neither the
Reduced Density Alternative nor the proposed project would result in significant impacts to energy
resources during construction of the site.
Operation
The operation of the 386 -acre site would result in an increase of energy demand, via electricity,
natural gas, and petroleum compared to existing conditions. Alternative 3 proposes a reduced density
project, therefore, Alternative 3 would result in reduced consumption of energy during operation of
the site, and would consume 6,223,867.4 kWh of electricity and 14,424,564 kBTU of natural gas per
year. This is approximately 28 percent and 34 percent less electricity and natural gas consumed,
respectively, compared to the project. Consistent with the analysis in Section 4.5, Energy Resources,
the use of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum fuel during operation of Alternative 3 would not be
excessive, wasteful, or unnecessary.
Given the presence of the Wave Basin and the units, hotel rooms and commercial uses under
Alternative 3, it is likely that the same improvements to the IID substation required under the
proposed project would be required. These improvements will provide power for the proposed
project and Alternative 3.
The construction and operation of both the Reduced Density Alternative and the proposed project
would result in an increase of energy demand in the area, due to the proposed residential, resort,
commercial, and recreational uses. However, Alternative 3 would result in less consumption of energy
resources during construction and operation, due to the reduced density of the site.
Neither the proposed project nor Alternative 3 would result in significant impacts regarding energy
resources.
Geology and Soils
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. Under Alternative 3, the site would develop 400
residential dwelling units, 100 resort/hotel rooms, 38,000 square feet of resort commercial uses, and
40,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, and recreational facilities (i.e., the 16.62 -acre
Wave Basin) and ropes course/zipline facilities.
As determined in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, the site is not located in or near an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake fault zone.
To mitigate impacts from seismic events, structures proposed in Alternative 3 would be required to
be developed to the most current state and local standards regarding building construction. The
proposed structures would not be located immediately adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain to
the west. Therefore, the structures would not be impacted by rockslides or landslides. No septic
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-34 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
systems are proposed. The potential for impacts related to loss of topsoil, sedimentation, erosion,
and landform alterations associated with Alternative 3 is anticipated to be consistent with the
proposed project, because the entire site would be disturbed and restabilized, and impacts would be
less than significant.
Similar to the proposed project, development of Alternative 3 would be required to implement the
mitigation measures established in the project -specific Geotechnical Evaluation (Appendix G), and
implement paleontological monitoring. Alternative 3 would also result in the development of the
Wave Basin; therefore, the same design to comply with all seismic codes in effect at the time they are
constructed would be required. Mitigation Measure GEO-1, related to the Wave Basin would ensure
that the recreational facility is engineered and designed to reduce impacts of liquefaction at the site.
These mitigation measures would apply equally to Alternative 3's impacts, and reduce them to less
than significant levels.
Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts to geology and soils compared to the proposed project.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Implementation of Alternative 3 would entail construction and operation of a reduced density land
development scenario while maintaining the Wave Basin and associated recreational amenities.
Construction activities associated with Alternative 3 would similarly disturb the entire site for
development, but would involve a shorter construction duration due to a reduced number of dwelling
units and retail floor areas compared to the proposed project. Therefore, based on a shorter
construction time frame with a reduced use of construction equipment and mobile sources,
construction -related GHG emission impacts with Alternative 3 would be lower than those analyzed
under the proposed project.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-3, provided under
the Transportation discussion below, Alternative 3 is expected to generate 34% fewer trips compared
to the proposed project due to the reduced number of single-family residential dwelling units and
retail areas. Since this alternative maintains the Wave Basin feature, it would have comparable
emissions from the production of electricity and water particularly associated with that feature.
Although GHG emission increases or decreases are not linear in the CaIEEMod model, Alternative 3
would result in lower GHG emissions associated with vehicle trips. For the proposed project, PDFs
alone resulted in a GHG emissions reduction of approximately 30%. Compared to the proposed
project, Alternative 3 is expected to achieve a lower reduction in GHG emissions from PDF
implementation because Alternative 3 cannot be assumed to include commute trip reduction
programs, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles, on-site
photovoltaic electricity supply as PDFs (the other PDFs were assumed to be included in Alternative 3).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-35 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Overall, however, impacts associated with Alternative 3 would be lower than the proposed project
for construction and operations. Alternative 3 would be expected to result less than significant
impacts to greenhouse gas emissions and would thus substantially reduce or avoid the project's
significant GHG emissions impact.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Under Alternative 3, the residential, resort, and commercial uses are not expected to involve, as a
primary activity, the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in quantities or a
manner that would pose a threat to the project and its surroundings, or create a significant hazard
through a foreseeable accident involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
The hazardous materials during construction or operation of the site would be delivered, stored, and
handled to manufacturer instructions and industry standards.
During construction of the site, the contractor will identify a controlled staging area within the
property limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Strom Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if applicable. 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. The Reduced Density Alternative would implement safety procedures when
using, handling, storing hazardous materials and impacts would be less than significant.
Alternative 3 would include the operation of residential, resort, commercial, and recreational uses
included in the proposed project. Hazardous materials associated with landscape maintenance
(fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides), as well as the maintenance of equipment used onsite. The
applicant may be required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the Riverside
County Fire Department for the Wave Basin facility 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 a HMBP. This standard condition
would ensure that impacts from the release of hazardous materials at the site would be less than
significant.
Because of the expected resort pools and Wave Basin facility included in this alternative, Section
65529, Public Pool Disinfection, of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), requiring
continuous disinfection would apply. The Wave Basin and resort hotel pool facilities would be
required to adhere to all applicable standards and regulations within the California Health and Safety
Code, 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 Wave Basin prior to
construction would be the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health.
As determined in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the site is not located within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, therefore, Alternative 3 would not impact schools.
Additionally, the property and a radius of 0.75 miles was not identified to be on a list of hazardous
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-36 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
materials site. Therefore, Alternative 3 would not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment.
Construction and operation of Alternative 3 will increase vehicular and multi -modal transportation
along the local major roadways in the City. Access would be consistent with the proposed project. A
Traffic Control Plan would be required to be implemented throughout all construction activities.
Project access points will be reviewed by the Fire Department, to ensure adequate access for
emergency vehicles.
Implementation of Alternative 3, like the proposed project, is not expected to interfere with critical
facilities, emergency transportation and circulation, or emergency preparedness coordination.
Alternative 3 would be reviewed by City, Police and Fire officials to ensure adequate fire service and
safety as a result of project implementation. Consistent with the proposed project, Alternative 3
would result in less than significant impacts.
Finally, the property is not located in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(VHFHSZ) according to CALFIRE's High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsible Areas Map.
Therefore, impacts of exposing people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires are
expected to be less than significant for both the Reduced Density Alternative and the proposed
project.
The Reduced Density Alternative and the proposed project would result in less than significant
impacts regarding hazards and hazardous materials.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Although Alternative 3 represents a density reduction of approximately one-third, it would have a
comparable disturbance area compared to the proposed project. Engineering design for Alternative
3 would be required to comply with City standards for the on-site retention of storm flows during the
100 -year storm, and would be expected to design retention basins and similar facilities to those
proposed for the project.
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). There is
no aspect of Alternative 3 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 3 would result in an
overall reduced water demand compared to the proposed project due to the reduced number of
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-37 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
residential units, guest rooms, and commercial floor area. Such demand would not be expected to
substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, with
implementation of the regulatory program requirements designed specifically to prevent hydrologic,
stormwater and surface water impairments, the impacts resulting from Alternative 3 would be similar
to the proposed project and less than significant.
Land Use and Planning
The project site is currently located within the Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067)
area. Under SP -03-067, the land use designations for the property are Low Density Residential, Open
Space Recreational, and General Commercial land uses, as established by the City of La Quinta. The
property is currently zoned for Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), and Neighborhood
Commercial (CN).
The Reduced Density Alternative would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific
Plan Amendment, new Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map(s) and Site Development Permits, similar to
the proposed project. However, as determined in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of this Draft
EIR, none of these entitlements would result in any conflicts with or significant impacts to any land
use plan, policy or regulation. This is due to the project's and Alternative 3's consistency with the La
Quinta General Plan goals and policies, as outlined in Section 4.10. As previously stated, the project
and Alternative 3 propose a Zone Change to change the land use designations to RL, CN, Tourist
Commercial (CT), and Parks and Recreation (PR). The new Specific Plan would supersede the current
zoning designations on the project site and act as a developmental guide for the project. The
proposed Specific Plan will set forth the planning areas, land use policies, development standards,
and design guidelines for the Alternative. All development on the project site shall adhere to the
standards and requirements set forth in the Specific Plan. As demonstrated in Section 4.10, the
development standards for the proposed project, which would be similar to the development
standards in the Reduced Density Alternative, will not substantially differ from the Zoning Ordinance.
Additionally, this Alternative would not divide an established community. No impacts would occur.
Therefore, Alternative 3 and the proposed project would have similar and less than significant impacts
relating to land use and planning.
Noise
The operation and construction of Alternative 3 would result in an increase in onsite and offsite noise
compared to the existing conditions.
Construction
The Reduced Density Alternative proposes the construction and operation of residential dwelling
units, a resort hotel, resort commercial uses, neighborhood commercial uses, as well as a recreational
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-38 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Wave Basin. Similar to the proposed project, construction of Alternative 3 would increase the ambient
noise level because the entire site would be developed. However, Municipal Code requirement for
construction activity hours would be applied to Alternative 3. Construction would not occur outside
of these hours. Because development would occur throughout the site, the mitigation measures
applicable to the proposed project, which include utilizing construction equipment equipped with
properly operating and maintained mufflers; and locating equipment staging in areas separated from
noise -sensitive receivers would apply to this alternative. These mitigation measures will reduce
impacts of construction noise under this Alternative to less than significant levels, but based on the
reduced construction for this Alternative, construction noise will be reduced as compared to the
proposed project.
Operation
Operational noise associated with project -generated traffic would be less under Alternative 3, and is
not anticipated to be significant. Alternative 3 would develop residential structures to include noise
reduction features and materials for windows, (non -glass) doors, walls, roofs, and ventilation
consistent with building code requirements. The uses proposed under this Alternative, similar to the
proposed project, would not result in elevated noise levels on site. As demonstrated in Section 4.11,
Noise, the operation of the Wave Basin facility, which would also occur under this Alternative, would
not result in elevated noise levels on or off site because the daytime hourly noise levels at the off-site
receiver locations are expected to range from 39.8 to 53.3 dBA Leq, while the on-site project receiver
locations are expected to range from 51.8 to 64.5 dBA Leq, as determined in the project specific Noise
Study (Appendix K.1). Therefore, it was determined that the operational noise generated by the Wave
Basin and project activity would not exceed the City's significance threshold of 65 dBA. Additionally,
the noise level impacts will likely vary throughout the day and, as required for the proposed project,
will be limited to the daytime and evening hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., established as
Mitigation Measure NOI-6, and compliant with the recreational operational hours established by the
City of La Quinta.
Alternative 3 would also hold up to four, 4 -day special events per year associated with the Wave
Basin. The special events could attract up to 2,500 people per event. However, as determined in
Section 4.11, Noise, noise associated with these events will not result in significant impacts because
the special event conditions are anticipated to range from 60.5 to 73.9 dBA CNEL and will generate a
noise level increase of up to 3.2 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments (excluding Avenue 60
west of Madison Street). Based on the significance criteria established in Section 4.11, the project -
related noise level increases are considered to be less than significant under special events conditions
at the land uses adjacent to roadways conveying project traffic. Although Alternative 3 and the
project will cause in increase in noise levels of up to 3.2 dBA CNEL at the segment of Avenue 60 west
of Madison Street, this segment does not currently experience 65 dBA noise levels, and traffic will not
increase noise levels to 65 dBA. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-39 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Operational noise from the Reduced Density Alternative is not anticipated to be significant. However,
because this Alternative would involve less total construction and less daily vehicle trips, the Reduced
Density Alternative would result in reduced noise impacts, as compared to the proposed project, but
both would be less than significant.
Public Services
The Reduced Density Alternative project would introduce residents or uses that would place
additional demand on the City of La Quinta's public services. There would be an increased demand in
police services, fire and emergency services, schools, public facilities, and parks as a result of the
development of Alternative 3. 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 pay applicable Development Impact Fees. Impacts would be less than significant.
Alternative 3 would result in reduced impacts to public services compared to the proposed project
since the Alternative would reduce the density and intensity of development onsite. However, both
scenarios would result in less than significant impacts.
Transportation
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in an increase in traffic in the project area. Short-term
construction vehicle trip impacts would result from development of the alternative. However, these
impacts would be generally limited to permitted construction activity hours. Additionally,
construction traffic would cease once construction was complete. Access to the site would be
consistent with the proposed project. These roadways will provide public and emergency access in to
and out of the project property.
Operational traffic, as a result of Alternative 3, would also increase vehicle trips in the project area.
However, this Alternative would result in fewer impacts associated with operational traffic compared
to the proposed project. As shown in Table 7-3, Alternative 3 would result in 4,600 daily trips, which
would represent a 34% reduction when compared to the proposed project. As a result, it would be
expected that impacts to project area intersections would also be reduced.
Table 7-3 Alternative 3 Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Alternative 3 Trip Generation Comparison
Proposed Project (TIA)
-496 DU SFDR, 104 DU MF, 150 RM Hotel, 60 TSF Retail. 12 AC Wave Basin
Facility, 15 TSF Wave Village, 16 TSF The Farm
147
300
447
383
255
638
6,994
Reduced Density
-331 DU SFDR, 69 DU MF, 100 RM Hotel, 40 TSF Retail, 12 AC Wave Basin
Facility, 10 TSF Wave Village, 11 TSF The Farm
96
197
293
252
160
412
4,600
Alternative 3 Delta (Alternative — TIA)
-51
-103
-154
-131
-95
-226
-2,394
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-40
June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Phase 2 of the proposed project is anticipated to generate 2778 daily trips. 6 study area intersections
are anticipated to be impacted with or without construction of any project on the property. Phase 3
of the proposed project is anticipated to generate 6,994 daily trips. 9 study area intersections are
anticipated to be impacted with or without construction of any project on the property. Because
Alternative 3 is anticipated to generate 4,600 daily trips it will fall approximately in the middle of
Phase 2 and 3 of the proposed project and will be responsible for its fair share contribution for a
minimum of 6 study area intersections and a maximum of 9 study area intersections. Required
improvements will result in acceptable LOS for all intersections, and Alternative 3 would be required
to contribute to these improvements in the same manner as the proposed project.
This Alternative is expected to have a reduced total VMT as a result of the reduced number of
residents and commercial development. In addition, Alternative 3 would have a reduced per capita
VMT because the reduced number of homes would still benefit from on-site commercial and
recreational interactions, and would not require off-site trips. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result
in reduced VMT and less than significant impacts in this regard, but both Alternative 3 and the
proposed project have less than significant VMT impacts.
Although the proposed project would result in more traffic than the Reduced Density Alternative,
both projects would result in less than significant impacts, with the construction of improvements
similar to those required of the proposed project.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 3, the property would result in similar impacts to tribal cultural resources as the
proposed project because both scenarios would disturb the same area of the project site, which has
tribal cultural resources located throughout. Additionally, both projects would be required to partake
in tribal consultation of the site with local tribes. Consistent with the requirements of Section 4.14,
Tribal Cultural Resources, development of Alternative 3 would require mitigation measures to reduce
project impacts to tribal cultural resources to less than significant levels.
Utilities and Service Systems
Compared to the existing vacant conditions, the Reduced Density Alternative would increase utilities,
such as water service and supply, wastewater collection and treatment, solid waste, electricity,
natural gas, and telecommunication services due to the proposed uses on the property. However,
the increase in demand for utilities in Alternative 3 would be less than under the proposed project.
Water
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) supplies water to the City of La Quinta and surrounding
areas. Alternative 3 would result in an increase in water demand during construction and operation
of the proposed residential, resort, commercial, and recreational uses. The Reduced Density
Alternative would result in less water demand compared to the proposed project given the reduced
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-41 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
number of residential units, the reduced number of resort/hotel rooms, and the reduced footprint of
commercial uses. However, water use required for the Wave Basin would be the same for both
scenarios. As determined in the Alternatives Water, Electricity, and Natural Gas Comparisons
(Appendix 0), Alternative 3 would result in 906.55 AFY of water consumption a year, a reduction of
52.08 AFY compared to the proposed project, which would consume 958.63 AFY. Alternative 3 would
also result in the outdoor water use of 801.35 AFY, which is below CVWD's Maximum Applied Water
Allowance (MAWA) of 962 AFY. This Alternative would also require water lines at the site in order to
support the development proposed for the Reduced Density Alternative.
Alternative 3 would require the preparation of a Water Supply Assessment, for review and approval
by CVWD. Because water use would be reduced as compared to the proposed project's less than
significant impacts, as determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, Alternative 3 would
also result in less than significant impacts to water supply and infrastructure.
Wastewater
Wastewater service, provided by CVWD, would be required for the operation of Alternative 3. The
Reduced Density Alternative would be result in less wastewater demand, due to Alternative 3's
reduced land use densities. Based on the on -third density reduction, a corresponding reduction in
wastewater would be expected, resulting in 104,559.3 gpd for Alternative 3. Section 4.15, Utilities
and Service Systems determined that CVWD has sufficient capacity to support the project. Since
Alternative 3 would reduce the proposed project by 52,279.7 gpd, this Alternative would result in less
wastewater than the proposed project. Therefore, CVWD would have adequate facilities to support
the Reduced Density Alternative.
Although the impacts to wastewater facilities will be reduced in Alternative 3 compared to the
project, both scenarios would result in less than significant impacts.
Solid Waste
Development of the Reduced Density Alternative would generate solid waste. Solid waste services
would be provided by Burrtec. The development of the Reduced Density Alternative would require
solid waste services for construction activities. However, construction waste produced by Alternative
3 would not be significant and would cease after the facilities were developed. The operation of
Alternative 3 would increase solid waste.
Since Alternative 3 would result in the development of a reduced density project, solid waste
generated by operation of Alternative 3 would be less than the waste generated by the proposed
project. As determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, the landfills that would service
the property have adequate capacity to support solid waste generated by the proposed project, and
therefore, the Reduced Density Alternative would also result in less than significant impacts.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-42 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Electricity
Electricity would be required for construction and operation of Alternative 3. However, it is likely that
electricity consumed by Alternative 3 would result in less impacts to electrical services as compared
to the project. Alternative 3 would consume approximately 6,223,867.4 kWh of electricity annually,
which is approximately 28 percent less than the proposed project.
The proposed project would be required to connect to an existing IID substation to provide electricity
to the project site. The increase of electrical demand for Alternative 3 would be supported by the
proposed infrastructure, with implementation of the same improvements as the proposed project,
given the relatively large development and the operation of the wave pool facility under this
alternative.
Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts to electricity.
Natural Gas
Natural Gas, provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), would be required for the
operation of Alternative 3. However, natural gas consumed by Alternative 3 would require less natural
gas compared to the project. Alternative 3 would consume approximately 14,424,564 kBTU of natural
gas annually, which is approximately 34 percent less natural gas than the proposed project.
The Reduced Density Alternative would be required to connect to existing SoCalGas infrastructure to
provide natural gas to the project site. Additional natural gas infrastructure is not required. The
increase of natural gas demand for the Reduced Density Alternative would be less than the proposed
project, and would result in less than significant impacts.
Telecommunications
The Reduced Density Alternative would be required to connect to existing telecommunication
services, either by Frontier or Spectrum to provide telecommunication services to the project site.
Additional infrastructure would not be required as determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service
Systems. The increase of telecommunication demand for the site would be less than significant.
Summary of Comparative Impacts
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives is provided in Table 7.6,
Comparison of Alternatives to Project. As described above, the Reduced Density Alternative would
result in similar impacts to the proposed project related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural
resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use
and planning, and tribal cultural resources.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-43 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in reduced impacts regarding air quality, energy
resources, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, public services, transportation, and utilities, as compared
to the proposed project.
Relationship to Project Objectives
While potentially significant impacts would be reduced with the Reduced Density Alternative, the
following project objective would not be achieved with Alternative 3:
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
This Alternative would also generate less transient occupancy tax and sales tax revenue for the City
than the proposed project, but would achieve the project objective of enhancing the City's economic
base to a lesser degree.
7.4.4 Alternative 4 — Golf/Resort Hotel
Under the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative ("Alternative 4"), the project would be developed with a
resort hotel of 150 hotel rooms and 57,000 square feet of associated recreational, restaurant and
retail amenities, an 18 -hole championship golf course that would be open to the public to play on a
daily fee basis, and 600 low-density residential units. Under this Alternative, no Neighborhood
Commercial would occur on the northeast corner of the property, and that land would be
incorporated into the residential development on the site. No Wave Basin facility would be included
in this alternative.
Although Alternative 4 would be consistent with the golf and residential uses allowed under the
existing entitlements, the project would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific
Plan Amendment, and new Specific Plan to allow the hotel use, as well as Tentative Tract Map(s), and
Site Development Permits.
This Alternative is expected to result in similar impacts compared to the proposed project, except
that impacts related to aesthetics and nighttime lighting would likely be reduced. In addition, this
alternative is expected to require more water than the proposed project to maintain the golf course.
A comparative analysis of impacts for Alternative 4 is provided below.
Aesthetics
Under the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative, impacts relating to aesthetic resources would be reduced
compared to the proposed project due to the removal of the lighting and light towers for the Wave
Basin. The residential, resort, and golf uses proposed in Alternative 4 would be subject to City review
regarding architecture and design to ensure the development of a high-quality project. The residential
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-44 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
land use would adhere to Specific Plan standards involving building heights and setbacks in order to
reduce its impact on the existing scenic vistas, which primarily include the Santa Rosa Mountains to
the south, and Coral Mountain to the west. Currently, views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa
Mountains are largely unobstructed when viewed at the site. Existing facilities and infrastructure
surrounding the project area partially obstruct the views of the mountains when viewed from the
public rights-of-way and contribute to the existing visual character of the area. These include man-
made structures, landscaping, residential homes, public facilities, barrier walls, and hedges.
Development of the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in impacts to the existing scenic vista,
which is currently unobstructed. The proposed residential, resort, and golf uses proposed for
Alternative 4 would be expected to impose Specific Plan requirements restricting building heights for
buildings with 150 feet of the Avenue 58 and Madison Street rights-of-way in order to reduce impacts
to scenic vistas observed from these roads. As determined in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, development of
the property would result in impacts to the existing views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa
Mountains, depending on the viewpoint location. Some locations along the public rights -of -ways,
where the scenic vistas are most likely to be viewed, provide unobstructed views of the Mountains,
however, development of the perimeter block wall and residential homes, as well as perimeter
landscaping may result in partially obstructed views of the Mountains at some locations. However,
the obstructed views depend on the location of the viewpoint, in conjunction with features along the
project's frontage, including the landscape (tree and canopy size) and the location of the residential
structures and rooftops. Therefore, this Alternative would be required to implement Mitigation
Measure AES -1, which requires the perimeter walls to be setback from the Madison Street and
Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30 feet (10 feet more than required under
the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review and approval of final perimeter wall
and landscape plans, and Mitigation Measure AES -2, which requires a minimum setback of 75 feet
between any residential structure and the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way.
However, even with Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2, the Alternative's impacts on existing
views of scenic resources are significant and unavoidable, as are the proposed project's.
Similar to the proposed project, the residential and resort uses proposed would be consistent with
those currently within the City of La Quinta. Low density residential communities are located north,
east, and south of the project site. Residential dwellings developed for the proposed project and
Alternative 4 would be similar to the existing dwellings in the City, and no commercial development
would occur at Avenue 58 and Madison Street, which would be consistent with the residential
character of the area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Alternative 4 proposes a project with resort, residential, and golf uses. Light and glare generated by
the Alternative would be similar to the existing land uses in the surrounding area (i.e., residential and
golf communities). Alternative 4 would be required to comply with the City of La Quinta's outdoor
lighting standards established in Chapter 9.100.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the La Quinta Municipal
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-45 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Code (LQMC), and would not require modification to these standards in its Specific Plan, since no light
poles would be required for the Wave Basin facility. Light generated by the Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative would be less than under the proposed project, and result in less than significant impacts.
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in lower and less than significant impacts to most
aesthetic resources such as visual character, and light and lighting. Compared to the proposed project,
these impacts would be reduced, due to the removal of the Wave Basin and neighborhood
commercial proposed for the project.
Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 4 would result in less impacts to aesthetic resources,
since the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would not develop the recreational Wave Basin or the
neighborhood commercial uses. However, both scenarios would result in significant impacts to
existing views of scenic vistas.
Air Quality
The combination of residential, hotel and golf course uses associated with Alternative 4 would result
in relatively lower traffic generation levels compared to the proposed project. Construction activities
associated with Alternative 4 would disturb the entire site for development and expected to involve
a similar construction duration, resulting in comparable construction -related emissions.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-4, provided under
the Transportation discussion below, Alternative 4 is expected to generate 3% fewer trips compared
to the proposed project from the residential, hotel and golf course uses. This alternative would have
lower emissions associated with the production of electricity and water because it would not involve
a Wave Basin feature.
Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear in the CaIEEMod model,
Alternative 4 would result in slightly lower emissions associated with vehicle trips. Alternative 4 would
not include all of the PDFs proposed for the project, and would therefore not benefit from the 12%
to 15% emission reductions associated with those PDFs. Without all of the PDF -related emission
reductions similar to the proposed project, the 3% reduction in vehicle trips alone is not expected to
lower emissions to less than significant levels without the need for mitigation. The modest reduction
in trips under this Alternative would not be sufficient to reduce vehicle emissions to less than
significant levels. Overall, therefore, impacts associated with Alternative 4 would be comparable
during construction, but potentially greater and significant during operations.
Biological Resources
Under Alternative 4, conditions to biological resources would be similar to the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-46 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
As established in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, development of the 386 -acre property would
result in impacts to biological resources, therefore, mitigation measures are recommended to reduce
these impacts to less than significant. The mitigation measures require burrowing owl and bat surveys
to occur prior to construction, and the removal of vegetation at the site to occur outside of the general
bird nesting season (January 15 through August 31), or pre -construction nesting bird surveys, as
applicable. Alternative 4 would be required to implement these mitigation measures to reduce
impacts to biological resources to less than significant levels, since it would result in the same level of
disturbance. Alternative 4 would result in similar impacts to biological resources compared to the
proposed project.
Cultural Resources
Per the conclusions in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of this Draft EIR, the development of the 386 -
acre site may result in impacts to cultural resources, however, these impacts can be mitigated to less
than significant levels. Alternative 4 would result in development of the 386 -acre site, and would be
required to implement the mitigation measures established in Section 4.4. In order to reduce impacts
to less than significant levels this Alternative would be required to: develop a comprehensive
recordation program prepared by a qualified archaeologist; retain a qualified archaeologist during all
project -related ground disturbing activities; hire an approved Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
(ACBCI) Native American Cultural Resource Monitor during any ground disturbing activities;
implement cultural sensitivity training for all contractors; establish protected easements and National
Register nominations; preserve the historic adobe and avoid the unknown archaeological sites along
the base of Coral Mountain. The implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure impacts
to cultural resources are reduced to less than significant levels.
Compared to the proposed project, the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in similar impacts
to cultural resources. Both the proposed project and Alternative 4 would avoid impacts associated
with potential disturbance to cultural resources with the implementation of mitigation measures.
Energy
Consumption of energy during construction and operation of Alternative 4 would be reduced
compared to the proposed project since this Alternative does not propose the commercial
component in the northeast corner of the site, or the development of the Wave Basin (and its
associated infrastructure). Construction of Alternative 4 would likely occur during a similar time frame
as the proposed project. However, operation of Alternative 4 would result in less impacts to energy
resources compared to the project.
Construction
Short-term energy consumption related to construction activities would occur during development
of Alternative 4. Construction -related energy use would include the consumption of electricity for
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-47 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
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. However, as
determined in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, the use of electricity and petroleum during the would
not be excessive, or unnecessary, and would cease at the conclusion of construction. Both scenarios
would result in less than significant impacts to energy resources during construction of the site.
Operation
The operation of Alternative 4 would result in an increase of energy demand, via natural gas, and
petroleum, however, Alternative 4 would result in reduced consumption of electricity. Alternative 4
would consume approximately 6,952,466.8 kWh of electricity annually, which is approximately 19.5
percent less electricity than the proposed project. This is due to the removal of the Wave Basin and
neighborhood commercial uses. Alternative 4 would consume approximately 22,491,253.2 kBTU of
natural gas annually, which is a 3 percent increase over that used by the proposed project. This is due
to the increase of single family residential homes.
The proposed project is required to connect to an existing IID substation (offsite). Under Alternative
4, given the amount of residential and resort development in this Alternative, it is anticipated that
the same off-site improvements will be required by IID.
Alternative 4 does not propose the development of neighborhood commercial uses or the Wave
Basin. Instead, the property would include an 18 -hole golf course, resulting in reduced consumption
of energy resources during operation compared to the proposed project. Both the Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative and the proposed project would result in an increase of energy demand in the area, due
to the proposed residential, resort, and recreational uses. However, energy consumed during
construction and operation of Alternative 4 and the proposed project are anticipated to result in less
than significant impacts.
Geology and Soils
Because the entire site would be developed under Alternative 4, 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 with the
incorporation of mitigation measures consistent with those applied to the proposed project.
Development of the property would be required to comply with the building code, and with the
recommendations provided in the site-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix G) to ensure the
onsite soils can support the proposed foundations and structures. Additionally, Alternative 4 would
be required to retain a qualified paleontological monitor during all earth -moving operations reaching
beyond the depth of two feet.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-48 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative does not propose the development of the Wave Basin facility;
however, it is likely that Alternative 4 would introduce lakes throughout the golf course area for
retention and aesthetic purposes. These features are typical for golf courses.
Alternative 4 would result in similar impacts to geology and soils compared to the proposed project,
and both would result in less than significant impacts.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The combination of residential, hotel and golf course uses associated with Alternative 4 would disturb
the entire site for development and involve a similar construction duration, resulting in comparable
construction -related GHG emissions.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-4, provided under
the Transportation discussion below, Alternative 4 is expected to generate 3% fewer trips compared
to the proposed project from the residential, hotel and golf course uses. This Alternative would have
lower emissions associated with the production of electricity and water because it would not involve
a Wave Basin feature.
Alternative 4 would not include all of the PDFs proposed for the project, and would therefore not
benefit from the 30% GHG emission reductions associated with those PDFs. Without the PDF -related
emission reductions similar to the proposed project, the 3% reduction in vehicle trips alone is not
expected to lower emissions to less than significant levels without the need for mitigation. This is in
part because the PDFs under this Alternative do not achieve the same level of reductions that are
attained under the proposed project. Overall, therefore, impacts associated with Alternative 4 would
be comparable during construction, but potentially greater and significant during operations, and
similar to those of the proposed project.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Alternative 4 would not introduce any potentially new hazardous materials related to construction
activities or operation. The nature of these uses is not expected to involve, as a primary activity, the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in quantities or a manner that would pose
a threat to the project and its surroundings, or create a significant hazard through a foreseeable
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The hazardous
materials during construction or operation of the site would be delivered, stored, and handled to
manufacturer instructions and industry standards.
During construction of the site, the contractor will identify a controlled staging area within the
property limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Strom Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if applicable. There would be no uses onsite that would potentially create
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-49 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
a hazardous risk to the public or environment or any activities that would inhibit any established
hazard evacuation plan. The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would implement safety procedures when
using, handling, storing hazardous materials and impacts would be less than significant.
The site, under Alternative 4, would include the operation of residential, resort, and recreational uses.
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. The applicant may be required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan
(HMBP) to the Riverside County Fire Department. This standard condition applies to Alternative 4 and
would ensure that impacts from the release of hazardous materials at the site would be less than
significant.
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative proposes a 150 -room resort hotel. Public pools associated with the
hotel shall be required to adhere to all applicable standards and regulations within the California
Health and Safety Code, the California Code of Regulations (CCR), the California Building Code and the
California Electrical Code regarding public swimming pools, including disinfection. The enforcing
agency that would evaluate the plans for the property prior to construction would be the Riverside
County Department of Environmental Health.
As determined in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the site is not located within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, therefore, there would be no impact to a school
facility. Additionally, the property and a radius of 0.75 miles was not identified to be on a list of
hazardous materials site. Therefore, Alternative 4 would not create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment.
Construction and operation of the 386 -acre site will increase vehicular and multi -modal
transportation along the local major roadways in the City. Access to the site will be consistent with
that for the proposed project, except that fewer access points would be required because the
neighborhood commercial development would not occur. Local roadways will provide public and
emergency access in to and out of the project property. A Traffic Control Plan will be required as a
condition of approval to be implemented throughout all construction activities. Project access points
will be reviewed by the Fire Department, to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles.
Alternative 4 implementation is not expected to interfere with critical facilities, emergency
transportation and circulation, or emergency preparedness coordination. Alternative 4 and the
proposed project would result in less than significant impacts.
Finally, the property is not located in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(VHFHSZ) according to CALFIRE's High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsible Areas Map.
Therefore, impacts of exposing people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires are
expected to be less than significant in both the Reduced Density Alternative and the proposed project.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-50 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative and the proposed project would result in less than significant
impacts regarding hazards and hazardous materials.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Although Alternative 4 represents a different composition of land uses compared to the proposed
project, it would have a comparable disturbance area compared to the proposed project. Engineering
design for Alternative 4 would be required to comply with City standards for the on-site retention of
storm flows during the 100 year storm, and would be expected to design retention basins and similar
facilities to those proposed for the project that would be integrated into the golf course design.
Alternative 4 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 4 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 4 would be expected
to result in less than significant impacts to water demand from the local utility purveyor and such
demand levels would not be expected to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
with groundwater recharge. Therefore, with implementation of the regulatory program requirements
designed to prevent hydrologic, stormwater and surface water impairments, the impacts resulting
from Alternative 4 would be less than significant and similar to the proposed project.
Land Use and Planning
The project site is currently located with Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067) area.
Under SP -03-067, the land use designations for the property are currently Low Density Residential,
Open Space Recreational, and General Commercial land uses, as established by the City of La Quinta.
The property is currently zoned for Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), and Neighborhood
Commercial (CN).
Under Alternative 4, The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would require a General Plan Amendment,
Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, and new Specific Plan for the hotel use, as well as Tentative
Tract Map(s), and Site Development Permits. However, as determined in Section 4.10, Land Use and
Planning, of this Draft EIR, none of these entitlements would result in any conflicts with or significant
impacts to any land use plan, policy, or regulation. This is due to Alternative 4's consistency with the
La Quinta General Plan goals and policies, as outlined in Section 4.10. Alternative 4 would achieve
various goals and policies outlined within the City's General Plan, including the land use goal to
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-51 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
maintain a high-quality design that complements the City (Goal LU -2). Additionally, changes and
variations from the zoning code in a specific plan would be offset by high quality design, amenities
and a mix of land uses (Policy LU -2.1). Both the project and Alternative 4 would result in the continued
growth of the tourism and resort industries in the City (Goal ED -2). Therefore, Alternative 4 would
comply with goals and policies in the General Plan, and would result in less than significant impacts
to any land use plan, policy, or regulation.
Additionally, this Alternative, like the project site, would not divide an established community. No
impacts would occur.
Noise
The operation and construction of Alternative 4 would result in an increase in onsite and offsite noise
compared to the existing conditions. This is analyzed below.
Construction
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative proposes the construction and operation of residential, resort hotel
rooms, and an 18 -hole golf course. Similar to the proposed project, construction of Alternative 4
would increase the ambient noise level because the entire site would be disturbed. However,
construction activities would be expected to conform to specified hours, per Section 6.08.050 of the
La Quinta Municipal Code. Mitigation measures required for the proposed project, including utilizing
construction equipment equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers; and locating
equipment staging in areas separated from noise -sensitive receivers would also apply to Alternative
4. Construction noise would contribute a short-term impact and would cease once construction has
ended, and would be expected to be less than significant, consistent with the proposed project.
Operation
Operational noise associated with project -generated traffic is not anticipated to be significant under
Alternative 4. Structures in Alternative 4 would be subject to building code requirements for windows,
(non -glass) doors, walls, roofs, and ventilation to ensure noise observed onsite would be less than
significant.
The recreational Wave Basin would not be developed in the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative. Therefore,
neither the mechanical equipment required to operate the Wave, nor the four special events
associated with the Wave Basin would occur. However, the golf course could host special events of
comparable spectator capacity. As determined in Section 4.11, Noise, noise associated with the
proposed project's special events will not result in significant impacts, and neither would those
associated with Alternative 4.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-52 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Additionally, typical day trip generation would be 3 percent less than the proposed project. The
majority of operational noise impacts correlate with traffic levels, so noise under Alternative 4 is
expected to be slightly less than under the proposed project.
Alternative 4 would have equivalent construction noise impacts to the proposed project, but would
result in lower noise levels for the life of the project. As determined in Section 4.11, Noise, the
proposed project would not result in significant construction or operational noise impacts. The
Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in reduced noise levels, and would have less than
significant noise impacts.
Public Services
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative project would introduce residents or uses that would place
additional demand on the City of La Quinta's public services. There would be an increased demand in
police, fire, and emergency services, schools, public facilities, and parks, because Alternative 4 would
result in similar intensity of development as the proposed project. However, Alternative 4 would be
required to comply with applicable laws and codes imposed by the City and Riverside County Fire
Department, and to pay applicable Development Impact Fees. Impacts would be less than significant.
Alternative 4 would result in similar impacts to public services as the proposed project and Alternative
4 will result in less than significant impacts.
Transportation
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in a 3% decrease in overall daily trips in the project
area, as shown in Table 7-4. However, it will also result in a slight increase of peak hour trips in both
the AM and PM Peak hours due to the increase in traffic associated with the proposed development
of single-family homes.
Table 7-4 Alternative 4 Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In I Out
Total
Alternative 4 Trip Generation Comparison
Proposed Project (TIA)
-496 DU SFDR, 104 DU MF, 150 RM Hotel, 60 TSF Retail. 12 AC Wave Basin
Facility, 15 TSF Wave Village, 16 TSF The Farm
147
300
447
383
255
638
6,994
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative
-600 DU SFDR, 150 RM Hotel, 18 Hole Golf Course
162
334
496
403
261
664
6,799
Alternative 4 Delta (Alternative — TIA)
15
34
49
20
6
26
-195
Short-term construction vehicle trip impacts would result from the development of alternative.
However, like the proposed project, these impacts would be generally limited to permitted
construction activity hours. Primary access to the site will be consistent with the proposed project,
but will not include the neighborhood commercial access points. Local roadways will provide public
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 7-53
June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
and emergency access in to and out of the project property. A Traffic Control Plan will be implemented
throughout all construction activities.
Operational traffic as a result of the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would also increase typical day
vehicle trips in the project area compared to the existing condition (see Appendix N). The Golf Course
Resort would be open to the public, unlike the private club proposed for the project. Overall,
however, operation of Alternative 4 would decrease off-site vehicle trips by 3%, as compared to the
proposed project, (see Appendix N). Alternative 4 trip generation rates are anticipated to be only 195
daily trips below the proposed project which can be considered a negligible difference. Alternative 4
would therefore be responsible for the fair share contribution of the same 15 area roadway
improvements as the proposed project. Impacts for this Alternative relative to trip generation are
expected to be less than significant.
VMT: This Alternative is expected to have a higher total VMT on a per capita basis because this
Alternative removes the project's neighborhood -serving commercial uses that would reduce the
length of vehicle trips for the residents of this project and the surrounding communities (who would
need to drive further for those commercial amenities under this Alternative). Impacts relative to VMT
could potentially be significant and unavoidable for Alternative 4.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 4, the property would result in similar impacts to tribal cultural resources as the
proposed project. As determined in Section 4.14, Tribal Cultural Resources, development of the
project site would require mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to tribal cultural resources
to less than significant levels. Alternative 4 would be required to implement the same measures as
the proposed project.
Utilities and Service Systems
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would increase the use of utilities, such as water service and supply,
wastewater collection and treatment, solid waste, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication
services due to the proposed uses on the property.
Water
Water supply would be provided to the site by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). Alternative
4 would result in an increase in water demand during construction and operation of the proposed
residential, resort, and golf uses.
Although the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would remove the neighborhood commercial area and
the infrastructure associated with the Wave Basin, Alternative 4 would result in higher water demand
than the proposed project because of the water required to irrigate the championship 18 -hole golf
course. Based on the findings in the Alternatives Water, Electricity, and Natural Gas Comparisons
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-54 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
(Appendix 0), the Golf/Hotel Resort Alternative would result in 1,092.51 AFY of water demand, which
is 133.88 AFY more water demand than the proposed project. Residential indoor water demand for
Alternative 4 and the proposed project would be the same since both scenarios propose 600
residential units. Non-residential indoor demand for Alternative 4 would be less than the proposed
project due to the removal of the neighborhood commercial use. Although the Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative does not propose 60,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses in the northeast
portion of the site, the golf use proposed in Alternative 4 would likely result in the development of
clubhouse facilities that would result in non-residential indoor water demand. The operation of the
non-residential indoor uses (i.e., resort, resort commercial, golf -related facilities) in Alternative 4
would result in less water demand compared to the proposed project. Outdoor water demand for
Alternative 4 would be 952.52 AFY, which is below CVWD's Maximum Applied Water Allowance
(MAWA) for outdoor water use in the area. A Water Supply Assessment would be required for this
Alternative. Additional water lines would also be required at the site in order to support the increased
development proposed for the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative.
As determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed project would result in
less than significant impacts to water supply and infrastructure. CVWD determined in the project -
specific WSA/WSV that the water provider has sufficient supply to support the proposed project.
Alternative 4 would consume more water than the proposed project, however, the Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative would consume a small fraction of CVWD's water supply. This Alternative would result in
less than significant impacts to water supply.
Wastewater
Wastewater service, provided by CVWD, would be required for Alternative 4.
Although the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative does not propose 60,000 square feet of neighborhood
commercial uses in the northeast portion of the site, the golf use proposed in Alternative 4 would
likely result in the development of clubhouse facilities that would result in wastewater demand. The
operation of the residential, resort, resort commercial, and golf -related facilities in Alternative 4
would result in similar wastewater demand compared to the proposed project.
Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems concluded that CVWD has sufficient capacity to support
the proposed project. Alternative 4 would result in similar wastewater demand compared to the
proposed project. Therefore, CVWD would have adequate facilities to support the Golf/Resort Hotel
Alternative, and impacts associated with wastewater collection and treatment would be less than
significant for Alternative 4.
Solid Waste
Development of the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would introduce 600 residential dwelling units, 150
resort/hotel rooms, and an 18 -hole golf course. The construction and operation of the proposed site
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-55 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
would generate solid waste. Solid waste services would be provided by Burrtec. The development of
the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would require solid waste services for construction activities.
However, construction waste produced by Alternative 4 would not be significant and would cease
after the facilities were developed.
Solid waste generated by operation of Alternative 4 would result in less waste generated by the
reduced commercial development, consistent waste for the hotel and residential uses, and
potentially higher levels of green waste for the golf course. As determined in Section 4.15, Utilities
and Service Systems, the proposed project's impact to solid waste infrastructure (i.e., landfills) would
be less than significant. Compared to the project, Alternative 4 would result in somewhat lower solid
waste generation, and impacts would be somewhat lower, and would be less than significant.
Electricity
Electricity would be required for construction and operation of Alternative 4. However, it is likely that
electricity consumed by Alternative 4 would result in reduced demand for electrical services
compared to the project. Alternative 4 would consume approximately 6,952,466.8 kWh of electricity
annually, which is approximately 19.5 percent less electricity than the proposed project. This is due
to the removal of the Wave Basin, the mechanical equipment associated with the Wave Basin, and
neighborhood commercial uses.
The proposed project would be required to connect to an existing IID substation to provide electricity
to the project site. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
project would be installed underground. The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would be required to
connect to the existing substation, given the amount of residential and resort development in this
Alternative.
Both scenarios would result in less than significant impacts to electricity. Neither project would result
in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Natural Gas
Natural Gas, provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), would be required for the
operation of Alternative 4. However, it is likely that natural gas consumed by Alternative 4 would
result in increased impacts to natural gas services compared to the project due to the increased
number of single family residential units. Alternative 4 would consume approximately 22,491,253.2
kBTU of natural gas annually, which is a 3 percent increase over the proposed project.
Additional natural gas infrastructure is not required. The increase of natural gas demand for the
Alternative 4 would be less than significant.
Telecommunications
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-56 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would be required to connect to existing telecommunication
services, either by Frontier or Spectrum to provide telecommunication services to the project site.
Additional infrastructure would not be required as determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service
Systems. The increase of telecommunication demand for the site would be less than significant for
both Alternative 4 and the proposed project.
Summary of Comparative Impacts
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives is provided in Table 7-6,
Comparison of Alternatives to Project. As described above, the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would
result in similar and mitigatable impacts to the proposed project related to biological resources,
cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials,
hydrology and water quality, land use, public services, tribal cultural resources, and utilities (other
than water, electricity, and natural gas).
The Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would result in reduced impacts regarding aesthetics, energy
resources (electricity and petroleum use), noise, and utilities (electricity). Impacts to air quality,
energy resources (natural gas), transportation (VMTs), and utilities (regarding water supply and
natural gas) would be increased in Alternative 4 compared to the proposed project due to the
Alternative's golf course and additional single family residential units.
Relationship to Project Objectives
While potentially significant aesthetic impacts would be reduced or avoided with the Golf/Resort
Hotel Alternative, the following project objectives would not be achieved, or not achieved to the same
degree, with Alternative 4:
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
Alternative 4 would result in land uses (Golf/Resort Hotel/Residential) which are typical of the current
land use pattern in the City. With the exception of the construction of the Wave Basin, this Alternative
would result meet the project objectives, and generate transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax
revenues to benefit the City.
7.4.5 Alternative 5 — Lake Amenity/No Hotel
Under the Lake Amenity Alternative ("Alternative 5"), the project would be developed with a lake
amenity instead of the Wave Basin, and would include 750 low-density residential units and 8.4 acres
of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property, consistent with the existing entitlements
for the project site. The lake would be approximately 75 acres, and would be used for typical lake
uses, including small electric boats, sailing, kayaking and paddle boarding (but not gas -powered boats
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-57 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
or recreational watercraft). The lake would provide a private amenity for the project residents and
their guests, and would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. This Alternative
would not have the hotel or other Tourist Commercial uses and would not have the occasional special
events that would be associated with the Wave Basin.
Although Alternative 5 would be consistent with the existing residential and commercial uses allowed
under the existing entitlements, the project would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change,
Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map(s), and Site Development Permits.
This Alternative is expected to result in reduced impacts for noise, nighttime lighting and would avoid
the temporary impacts from special events that could occur at the Wave Basin up to four times a year.
However, the lake amenity would use more water than the proposed Wave Basin. A comparative
analysis of impacts for Alternative 5 is provided below.
Aesthetics
Under the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative, impacts to the aesthetic resources would be somewhat
reduced when compared to the proposed project. Alternative 5 proposes the development of 750
low density residential units and 8.4 acres of commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property.
These uses are consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations of the project site. The
development of these land uses would be compliant with the development standards established in
the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. The residential and commercial land uses would also be
consistent with the existing uses in the City of La Quinta, which is currently defined by residential
homes and communities north, east, and south of the project property.
Alternative 5 also proposes the development of a 75 -acre lake amenity, in place of the project's
proposed 16.62 -acre Wave Basin. As analyzed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of this Draft EIR, associated
infrastructure for the Wave Basin includes seventeen 80 -foot light fixtures for evening use of the
Wave Basin facility. The 75 -acre lake proposed in Alternative 5 would be used for typical lake uses,
including small electric boats, sailing, kayaking and paddle boarding (but not gas -powered boats or
recreational watercraft). Operation of the lake amenity will not include 80 -foot light fixtures,
therefore, Alternative 5 would result in less light impacts compared to the proposed project.
Impacts of Alternative 5 to scenic resources located on- and off-site would be similar to the proposed
project, since both projects propose development of the 386 -acre site. Impacts to the existing adobe
structure onsite would be avoided by placing a fence around the property to prevent development in
that area to protect the adobe. Impacts to existing views of the scenic resource, Coral Mountain,
would be similar to the proposed project because this Alternative would also include perimeter walls
and landscaping, as well as residential buildings, that will result in the partial obstruction of mid-range
and peak views of Coral Mountain. Therefore, both the project and Alternative 5 would be required
to implement Mitigation Measure AES -1, which requires the perimeter walls to be setback from the
Madison Street and Avenue 58 public rights-of-way by a minimum average of 30 feet (10 feet more
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-58 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
than required under the LQMC), which shall be confirmed through the City's review and approval of
final perimeter wall and landscape plans, and Mitigation Measure AES -2, which requires a minimum
setback of 75 feet between any residential structure and the Madison Street and Avenue 58 public
rights-of-way. However, even with Mitigation Measures AES -1 and AES -2, the project's impacts on
existing views of scenic resources are considered significant and unavoidable.
Alternative 5 does not propose the development of the Wave Basin, which includes 80 -foot light
fixtures surrounding the recreational facility. Therefore, the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would
result in reduced light and glare impacts compared to the proposed project.
Air Quality
Implementation of Alternative 5 would entail development focused on a public lake amenity
incorporated into a site design with 750 low-density residential dwelling units and 8.4 acres of
commercial uses at the northeast corner of the property, consistent with the existing entitlements
for the project site. Construction activities associated with Alternative 5 would disturb the entire site
for development and likely involve a similar construction duration, resulting in comparable
construction -related emissions. Based on preliminary engineering estimates, the earthwork activities
(cut and fill) associated with this alternative would result in a balanced on-site condition, resulting in
no soil import or export from the project site. This earthwork balance would be achieved by
distributing the cut earthwork quantities across the site elevation. As a result, no import or export -
related hauling would be involved with this Alternative.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-5, provided under
the Transportation discussion below, Alternative 5 is expected to generate 12% more trips compared
to the proposed project. Since this alternative would involve a lake amenity absent of the wave
generation feature, the emissions from the production of electricity for this feature would be
eliminated.
Although air quality emission increases or decreases are not linear in the CaIEEMod model,
Alternative 5 would result in higher emissions associated with vehicle trips. Alternative 5 would be
expected to have proportionally higher and potentially significant NOx and VOC emissions, which are
directly influenced by mobile sources. For the proposed project, PDFs and mitigation resulted in an
average reduction of 12% to 15% in criteria air pollutant emissions. Compared to the proposed
project, Alternative 5 is expected to achieve a lower reduction in criteria air pollutant emissions from
PDF implementation because Alternative 5 cannot be assumed to include commute trip reduction
programs, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored shuttles, on-site
photovoltaic electricity supply as PDFs (the other PDFs were assumed to be included in Alternative 5).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-59 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Overall, therefore, impacts associated with Alternative 5 would be comparable during construction,
but potentially higher and significant during operations.
Biological Resources
Under Alternative 5, impacts to biological resources would be similar to the proposed project, insofar
as the entire site would be disturbed.
As established in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, development of the 386 -acre property would
impact onsite biological resources, therefore, mitigation is recommended to reduce the impacts to
less than significant levels. The mitigation measures require burrowing owl and bat surveys to be
conducted prior to construction, and vegetation removal activities to occur outside of the general
bird nesting season (January 15 through August 31), or nesting surveys, as appropriate. The same
mitigation measures would be required for development of Alternative 5 to reduce impacts to
biological resources to less than significant levels.
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would reduce impacts associated with biological resources
with the implementation of the mitigation measures. Alternative 5 would result in similar impacts to
biological resources compared to the proposed project.
Cultural Resources
The development of the project site may result in impacts to cultural resources, which would also
occur with Alternative 5, since the entire site would be disturbed. Alternative 5 would be required to
implement the mitigation measures established in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, which include
developing a comprehensive recordation program prepared by a qualified archaeologist; retaining a
qualified archaeologist during all project -related ground disturbing activities; hiring an approved Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) Native American Cultural Resource Monitor during any
ground disturbing activities; implementing cultural sensitivity training for all contractors; establishing
protected easements and National Register nominations; preserving the historic adobe and avoiding
the known archaeological sites along the base of Coral Mountain. Both the proposed project and
Alternative 5 would reduce impacts associated with potential disturbance to cultural resources with
the implementation of mitigation measures.
Energy
Consumption of energy would be reduced under Alternative 5 since this alternative removes the
Tourist Commercial portion of the site and the Wave Basin facility. Therefore, energy consumption
associated with these uses would be removed with the implementation of Alternative 5. However,
energy consumption impacts associated with the residential, commercial, and open space (lake) land
uses would occur from the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative. These impacts are discussed below.
Construction
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-60 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Short-term energy consumption related to construction activities would occur during development
of Alternative 5. Construction -related energy use would include the consumption of electricity for
tools and power required for construction 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. Development of
Alternative 5 would result in a reduced demand for energy resources because total construction -
related energy use would be lower under this alternative because the hotel, Wave Basin, and resort -
related amenities and commercial uses would not be constructed. As determined in Section 4.5,
Energy Resources, the use of electricity and petroleum during buildout would not be excessive, or
unnecessary, and would cease at the conclusion of construction. Construction of Alternative 5 would
result in the same conclusion.
Operation
The operation of Alternative 5 would result in an increase of energy demand, via electricity, natural
gas, and petroleum. Alternative 5 would consume approximately 5,071,006 kWh of electricity
annually, and 13,280,466.5 kBTU of natural gas annually (Appendix 0). Energy use under this
alternative would be reduced by approximately 41% for electricity, and 40% for natural gas. As
determined in Section 4.5, Energy Resources, of this Draft EIR, the use of energy during the proposed
project operations would not be excessive, or unnecessary.
Under Alternative 5, connection to the existing substation, given the amount of residential
development in this Alternative, is anticipated, consistent with that required for the proposed project.
Alternative 5 would result in reduced consumption of energy resources since energy consumption
resulting from the Tourist Commercial and Wave Basin facility uses would not occur in the Lake
Amenity/No Hotel Alternative. However, due to the increased vehicle trips associated with the 750
residential units (11.7 percent increase compared to the project), Alternative 5 would result in
increased petroleum consumption compared to proposed project.
Overall, Alternative 5 would result in less energy use than the proposed project.
Geology and Soils
The project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. Under Alternative 5, the site would develop 750
low density residential dwelling units, 8.4 acres of neighborhood commercial uses, and a 75 -acre lake.
As determined in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, of this Draft EIR, the site is not located near an
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault zone.
Structures proposed in Alternative 5 would be developed to the most current state and local
standards regarding building construction to reduce impacts of seismic events to less than significant
levels. The proposed structures would not be located adjacent to the slopes of Coral Mountain to the
west. Therefore, the structures would not be impacted by rockslides or landslides. No septic systems
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-61 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
are proposed. The potential for impacts related to loss of topsoil, sedimentation, erosion, and
landform alterations associated with the construction and operation of the site is anticipated to be
less than significant because the project will implement standards and guidelines established by
agencies to reduce these impacts, such as grading standards, implementation of a Fugitive Dust
Control Plan, or a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, to name a few. Development of Alternative
5 would be required to implement the mitigation measures established in the project -specific
Geotechnical Evaluation and retain a qualified paleontologist during development of the site.
Alternative 5 would be required to implement these mitigation measures to reduce impacts to
habitable structures and paleontological resources.
Alternative 5 would also result in the development of a 75 -acre lake amenity; therefore, mitigation
would be required for the design of the water feature to reduce impacts of onsite soils to less than
significant levels. The 75 -acre lake would be required to implement mitigation so that the facility is
engineered and designed to reduce impacts of liquefaction and seismic events to less than significant
levels.
The implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce impacts to geology and soils to less
than significant for Alternative 5, consistent with the proposed project. Alternative 5 would result in
similar impacts to geology and soils compared to the proposed project.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The lake amenity, 750 low-density residential dwelling units and 8.4 acres of commercial uses
associated with Alternative 5 would disturb the entire site for development and involve a similar
construction duration, resulting in comparable construction -related GHG emissions.
The comparison of traffic generation totals among the five alternatives and proposed project are
summarized in the Coral Mountain Alternatives — Trip Generation and Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Comparison (Appendix N) provided by Urban Crossroads. As shown in Table 7-5, provided under
the Transportation discussion in Alternative 2, Alternative 5 is expected to generate 12% more trips
compared to the proposed project from the lake amenity, residential, and commercial uses. Since this
alternative would involve a public lake amenity absent of the wave generation feature, the emissions
from the production of electricity for this feature would be lower.
For the proposed project, PDFs alone resulted in a GHG emissions reduction of approximately 30%.
Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 5 is expected to achieve a lower reduction in GHG
emissions from PDF implementation because Alternative 5 cannot be assumed to include commute
trip reduction programs, telecommuting and alternative work schedules, employer-sponsored
shuttles, on-site photovoltaic electricity supply as PDFs (the other PDFs were assumed to be included
in Alternative 5). Overall, therefore, impacts associated with Alternative 5 would be comparable
during construction, but potentially higher and significant during operations.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-62 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Under Alternative 5, the property would develop 750 low density residential units, 8.4 acres of
neighborhood commercial, and a 75 -acre lake amenity. The nature of these uses is not expected to
involve, as a primary activity, the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in
quantities or a manner that would pose a threat to the project and its surroundings, or create a
significant hazard through a foreseeable accident involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment. The hazardous materials used during construction or operation of the site would
be delivered, stored, and handled to manufacturer instructions and industry standards.
During construction of the site, the contractor will identify a controlled staging area within the
property limits for storing materials and equipment, as required by a Strom Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if applicable. 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. The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would implement safety procedures
when using, handling, storing hazardous materials and impacts would be less than significant.
The site, under Alternative 5 and the proposed project, would include the operation of residential,
commercial, and recreational uses. The lack of resort or wave facilities would substantially reduce the
amounts of chemicals, fertilizers, and other products used on the site to levels consistent with single
family development.
The site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, therefore, neither
scenario would result in significant impacts to a school facility. Additionally, the property and other
properties within a radius of 0.75 miles were not identified to be on a list of hazardous materials site.
Therefore, Alternative 5 would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
Alternative 5 proposes the development of residential, commercial, and recreational land uses.
Construction and operation of the 386 -acre site will increase vehicular and multi -modal
transportation along the local major roadways in the City. Primary access to the site will occur along
Avenue 58, north of the site, Madison Street, east of the site, and Avenue 60, south of the site. These
roadways will provide public and emergency access in to and out of the project property. A Traffic
Control Plan will be implemented throughout all construction activities.
Project access points will be reviewed by the Fire Department, to ensure adequate access for
emergency vehicles.
Implementation of Alternative 5 is not expected to interfere with the critical facilities, emergency
transportation and circulation, emergency preparedness coordination. Alternative 5 would result in
less than significant impacts.
Finally, the property is not located in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(VHFHSZ) according to CALFIRE's High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsible Areas Map.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-63 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Therefore, impacts of exposing people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires are
expected to be less than significant under the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative.
Impacts associated with Alternative 5 would be reduced as it relates to the likely amount of chemicals,
cleaning products and disinfection products that would be transported, stored and used on the site.
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative and the proposed project would result in less than significant
impacts regarding hazards and hazardous materials.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Although Alternative 5 represents a different composition of land uses compared to the proposed
project and other alternatives being considered, its implementation would trigger the same
categories of 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. For construction compliance, Alternative 5 would require the development,
approval, and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to obtain
coverage under the State's NPDES Construction General Permit. For operational conditions (post -
construction), Alternative would require the development, approval, and implementation of a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP). Stormwater retention capacity would be integrated into the lake
feature and in disturbed retention basins throughout the residential and commercial areas. There is
no aspect of Alternative 5 that would indicate any need for a deviation from the regulatory
requirements and the associated stormwater controls.
The comparison of water demand between Alternative 5 and the proposed project is provided under
the Utilities and Service Systems heading. Such quantitative analysis indicates that Alternative 5
would be expected to result in a higher water demand than the project. However, the increase in
water demands associated with Alternative 5 would not be expected to substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, after following the
regulatory program requirements designed specifically to prevent hydrologic, stormwater and
surface water impairments, the impacts resulting from Alternative 5 would be similar to the proposed
project and less than significant.
Land Use and Planning
The project site is currently located with Andalusia at Coral Mountain Specific Plan (SP 03-067) area.
Under SP -03-067, the land use designations for the property are currently Low Density Residential,
Open Space Recreational, and General Commercial land uses, as established by the City of La Quinta.
The property is currently zoned for Low Density Residential (RL), Golf Course (GC), and Neighborhood
Commercial (CN).
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-64 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Although Alternative 5 would be consistent with the existing residential and commercial uses allowed
under the existing entitlements, the project would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change,
Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map(s), and Site Development Permits to allow the
recreational lake use and buildout of this Alternative. Alternative 5 would be compliant with the City's
General Plan goals and policies for land use, by providing high-quality design, with a mix of amenities
and land uses (Goal LU -2 and Policy LU -2.1). Alternative 5 would also design and construct parks and
recreational facilities that comply with all the development standards that apply to privately
constructed facilities (Policy PR -1.4). Impacts would be less than significant.
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 Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would
result in the development and operation of the site, resulting in an increase in noise, compared to the
existing conditions.
Construction
Construction of the proposed buildings and site grading would increase the ambient noise level
throughout the day during construction activities. However, construction activities are only permitted
to occur during the hours permitted per Section 6.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Alternative
5 would also be subject to the mitigation measures included in Section 4.11: utilizing construction
equipment equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers; and locating equipment
staging in areas separated from noise -sensitive receivers. These mitigation measures will reduce
impacts to less than significant levels. Construction noise would be short-term impact and would
cease once construction has ended.
Operation
Operational noise from Alternative 5 is not anticipated to be significant since the Lake Amenity/No
Hotel Alternative proposes uses similar to those in the surrounding area. Additionally, on- and off-site
traffic noise would result in less than significant impacts with the incorporation of design features
such as the installation of block walls along the project's perimeter.
The operation of Alternative 5 is not anticipated to include special events and noise associated with
the Wave Basin, hotel, resort commercial and special events would not occur during the operation of
the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative. Noise levels on site under this alternative would be reduced,
when compared to the proposed project, and would remain less than significant.
The 75 -acre lake proposed in Alternative 5 would allow typical lake activities, including the operation
of small electric boats, sailing, kayaking and paddle boarding (but not gas -powered boats or
recreational watercraft). Sailing, kayaking and paddle boarding would not result in any increase in
noise levels. Small electric boats generate up to 55 dBA noise levels and would not have any significant
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-65 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
impacts. Accordingly, the use of the lake would not be expected to result in substantial increases in
noise levels.
Trip generation rates for Alternative 5 are higher than the proposed project. Noise impacts can be
correlated with traffic levels and are therefore expected to be lower relative to the proposed project.
Operational noise from the Alternative is not anticipated to be significant since the project proposes
uses similar to those in the surrounding area (i.e., residential, recreational, etc.). The Lake Amenity/No
Hotel Alternative would result in reduced noise impacts, compared to the proposed project, due to
the elimination of the Wave Basin and other resort uses.
Public Services
The development of the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would introduce residents and uses that
would place additional demand on the City of La Quinta's public services. There would be an increased
demand in police, fire, and emergency services, as well as schools, public facilities, and parks as a
result of the development of 750 low density residential units, the 75 -acre lake amenity and the
neighborhood commercial uses. However, Alternative 5 would be required to comply with applicable
laws and codes imposed by the City and Riverside County Fire Department, and the pay applicable
Development Impact Fees. Therefore, impacts to public services are reduced to less than significant
impacts.
Alternative 5 would result in reduced calls for service associated with the hotel and resort commercial
uses included in the proposed project, but could result in equivalent calls for service associated with
the lake as compared to the wave facility. Neither Alternative 5 nor the proposed project will result
in significant impacts.
Transportation
Alternative 5 would result in an increase of transportation or traffic in the project area by
approximately 12% as compared to the proposed project, as shown in Table 7-5.
Table 7-5 Alternative 5 Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Alternative 5 Trip Generation Comparison
Proposed Project (TIA)
-496 DU SFDR, 104 DU MF, 150 RM Hotel, 60 TSF Retail. 12 AC Wave Basin
Facility, 15 TSF Wave Village, 16 TSF The Farm
147
300
447
383
255
638
6,994
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative
-750 DU SFDR, 60 TSF Retail, 75 AC Lake
158
415
573
491
314
805
7,811
Alternative 5 Delta (Alternative — TIA)
11
115
126
108
59
167
817
Short-term construction vehicle trip impacts would result from the development of this alternative.
However, these impacts would be generally limited to permitted construction activity hours per the
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR 7-66
June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
La Quinta Municipal Code. Additionally, construction traffic would cease once construction of the
residential, lake and commercial facilities were complete. Primary access to the site will occur along
Avenue 58, north of the site, Madison Street, east of the site, and Avenue 60, south of the site. These
roadways will provide public and emergency access into and out of the project property. A Traffic
Control Plan will be required as a condition of approval to be implemented throughout all
construction activities.
Operational traffic as a result of Alternative 5 would increase vehicle trips in the project area (see
Appendix N). Although the Lake Amenity would be limited to residents and their guests, operation of
Alternative 5 would have a 12% overall increase in vehicle trips compared to the proposed project
because of the increase in proposed residential dwelling units, and the reduction in trips captured
internally by the other project uses. Alternative 5 would result in more vehicle trips than the proposed
project.
Given the 12% increase in vehicle trips under this Alternative, intersections with vehicle delay
thresholds near levels of significance could potentially be impacted by Alternative 5 project traffic.
For example, an intersection such as Madison Street and Avenue 50, which has a delay of 54.8 (LOS
D) with proposed project traffic volumes, could be increased to LOS E (delay of 55.0) with the
additional traffic volumes associated with Alternative 5. Both Alternative 5 and the proposed project
would contribute to improvements required to maintain acceptable levels of service, resulting in less
than significant impacts under both scenarios.
This Alternative is expected to have a higher total VMT on a daily and per capita basis because it
generates more trips per day and lacks on-site complementary resort accommodations. Limited
neighborhood commercial development occurring under this alternative would reduce miles traveled
for conveniences, but would increase them for specialty shopping and restaurants, which would not
be located within the project. It is anticipated that impacts to VMTs would be significant and
unavoidable under Alternative 5.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 5, the property would result in similar impacts to tribal cultural resources because
the entire site would be disturbed. As determined in Section 4.14, Tribal Cultural Resources,
development of the project site would require mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to tribal
cultural resources to less than significant levels. Alternative 5 would be required to implement the
same measures. Impacts would be less than significant after implementation of mitigation, and would
be consistent with the impacts associated with the proposed project.
Utilities and Service Systems
Compared to the existing, vacant conditions, the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would increase
utilities, such as water service and supply, wastewater collection and treatment, solid waste,
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-67 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication services due to the proposed uses on the property.
The increase in demand for utilities in Alternative 5 would be less than the proposed project, with the
exception of water demand (discussed below).
Water
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would require water supply to the site. Water supply would
be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). Alternative 5 proposes the development
of 750 residential units, 8.4 acres of neighborhood commercial uses, and a 75 -acre lake amenity.
These uses would result in an increase in existing water demand during construction and operation
of the proposed residential, recreational, and commercial uses. According to the Alternatives Water,
Electricity, and Natural Gas Comparisons (Appendix 0), Alternative 4 would result in 1,110.36 AFY of
water consumption a year because of the operation of the lake amenity. This is an increase of 151.73
AFY compared to the proposed project, which would consume 958.63 AFY. CVWD has a groundwater
supply of 194,000 AFY. A Water Supply Assessment would be required for Alternative 5, to determine
whether CVWD has sufficient capacity to support the alternative in normal and dry years. However,
given the results of the proposed project's WSA, and the increase resulting from this alternative, it is
likely that CVWD would have capacity to accommodate Alternative 5, and impacts would be less than
significant. Water lines would also be required at the site in order to support the residential and
commercial development proposed for the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative.
Alternative 5 would result in a water demand increase of 151.73 AFY, as compared to the proposed
project. This Alternative could result in significant and unavoidable impacts because it exceeds
CVWD's Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) limits, which is 962 AFY. Alternative 5 would
result in outdoor water demand of 972.95 AFY.
Wastewater
Wastewater service would also be provided to the property by CVWD. Wastewater produced under
this alternative would be less than under the proposed project, since the Lake Amenity/No Hotel
Alternative would eliminate the hotel and resort commercial land uses, so sewage treatment capacity
would be sufficient to serve this alternative. Additional sewer lines would be required to serve both
Alternative 5 and the proposed project.
Both scenarios would result in an increase in wastewater, however, as determined in Section 4.15,
Utilities and Service Systems, impacts would be less than significant. The impacts to wastewater
facilities will be reduced in Alternative 5, and would be less than significant.
Solid Waste
Burrtec would provide the property with solid waste services. The development of the Lake
Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would require solid waste services to remove waste produced by
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-68 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
construction activities. However, construction waste produced by Alternative 5 would not be
significant and would cease after the facilities were developed.
Solid waste generated by Alternative 5 would be less than waste generated by the proposed project
since Alternative 5 would eliminate the resort uses, including a recreational surf Wave Basin, the hotel
and the tourist commercial development. Alternative 5 would have only residential, neighborhood
commercial and recreational uses. Compared to Alternative 5, the proposed project would generate
more solid waste, but the impact for the project and this Alternative would be less than significant.
Electricity
Electricity would be required for construction and operation of Alternative 5. However, it is likely that
electricity consumed by Alternative 5 would be reduced as compared to the proposed project.
electricity consumed by Alternative 5 would be approximately 5,071,006 kWhr annually, which is
approximately 41 percent less than the proposed project.
The proposed project would be required to connect to an existing IID substation to provide electricity
to the project site. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
project shall be installed underground. The increase of electrical demand for the proposed project
would be supported by the proposed infrastructure.
Both projects would result in less than significant impacts to electricity.
Natural Gas
Natural Gas, provided by Southern California Gas Company, would be required for the operation of
Alternative 5. However, it is likely that the amount of natural gas consumed by Alternative 5 would
be reduced as compared to the proposed project due to the lack of resort uses and amenities.
Alternative 5 would result in the consumption of 13,182,066.5 kBTU of natural gas annually. This is
approximately 40 percent less than the proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant.
The decrease of natural gas demand for this Alternative would be less than significant, and less than
that required for the proposed project.
Telecommunications
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would be required to connect to existing telecommunication
services by Frontier or Spectrum to provide telecommunication services to the project site. Additional
infrastructure would not be required as determined in Section 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems.
The increase of telecommunication demand for the site would be less than significant for both this
Alternative and the proposed project.
Summary of Comparative Impacts
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-69 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project alternatives is provided in Table 7-6,
Comparison of Alternatives to Project. As described above, the Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative
would result in similar and mitigatable impacts to the proposed project related to biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and
water quality, land use, public services, and tribal cultural resources.
The Lake Amenity/No Hotel Alternative would result in reduced impacts regarding aesthetics, energy
resources (electricity and natural gas), noise, and utilities (other than water use) as compared to the
proposed project. However, Alternative 5 would result in increased impacts to air quality, greenhouse
gas emissions, energy (petroleum), transportation, and utilities (water demand) due to the 75 -acre
recreational lake and the increased number of vehicle trips. Alternative 5 would result in potentially
significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation (VMTs), and utilities
(water demand).
Relationship to Project Objectives
While some potentially significant impacts would be reduced with the Lake Amenity/No Hotel
Alternative, the following project objectives would not be achieved with Alternative 5:
• To create a private resort community with a variety of interrelated and mutually supportive
commercial and recreational land uses that will also generate transient occupancy and sales
tax revenues in order to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
• To promote walkability and non -motorized connectivity as an integral part of the project
design, including (1) establishing residential neighborhoods that are linked through multi -use
trails that connect neighborhoods throughout the project; and (2) providing "walk streets" in
the Resort area to provide internal connection between facilities within the Resort and the
Wave Basin.
• Establish a density hierarchy that situates the highest density development within the resort
and gradually reduces density as you move away from the resort into the surrounding
residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the overall density previously included for this
property in the Andalusia Specific Plan.
• Develop a high-quality private wave basin (The Wave) that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". !
7,5 Environmentally Superior Alternative
As previously discussed, analysis of a reasonable range of Alternatives is required by CEQA. The
purpose of the Alternatives analysis is to explain potentially feasible ways to avoid or minimize the
significant effects identified for the project. Furthermore, State CEQA Guidelines, Section
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-70 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
15126.6(e)(2) requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior alternative among those
evaluated in an EIR.
A summary comparison of impacts associated with the project Alternatives is provided in Table 7-6,
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 7-6 reveals
the environmental impacts of the proposed project and whether Alternative 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 reduces,
increases, or creates similar impacts to the proposed project. Of the Alternatives considered in this
Draft EIR section, the No Project/No Build Alternative is environmentally superior to the other
Alternatives because this Alternative would avoid any impacts identified for the project or any other
alternative.
Although Alternative 1 is environmentally superior, it does not meet any of the objectives of the
proposed project because it would not involve any development of the site.
Of the remaining alternatives, Alternative 3 (reduced density project) would be the environmentally
superior alternative because it would cause incremental reductions with respect to the
environmental topics specified below. However, Alternative 3 would fail to adequately meet the
proposed project's basic objective of maintaining the overall density count previously included in the
Andalusia Specific Plan and would not generate the same levels of transient occupancy and sales taxes
to enhance the City's economic base and long-term financial stability.
Alternative 4 (Golf/Resort Hotel) would result in incremental increased impacts to air quality, energy
resources (natural gas), transportation, and utilities (water demand) compared to the project. The
increased impacts are associated with Alternative 4's increased low density residential units, and the
public golf course (open to play on a daily fee basis). The development of these uses increases daily
trips and VMTs, as well as air quality emissions associated with vehicles, and the outdoor water use
proposed for the golf course. Alternative 4 would have incrementally reduced impacts to aesthetics,
noise, electricity, and petroleum use, but would have the same significant and unavoidable impact to
existing views of scenic resources. Additionally, the Golf/Resort Hotel Alternative would not achieve
the objective of developing a high-quality private Wave Basin that provides unique recreational
opportunities for future residents of the project, and that attracts resort guests and creates a
landmark facility that will enhance the City's reputation as the "Gem of the Desert". Alternative 4
would result in land uses (Golf/Resort Hotel/Residential) which are typical of the current land use
pattern in the City. With the exception of the construction of the Wave Basin, this Alternative would
meet the project objectives, and generate transient occupancy tax (TOT) and sales tax revenues to
benefit the City.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-71 June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Table 7-6 Comparison of Alternatives and Project
Environmental
Topic
Impacts of the
Proposed Project
Alternative 1
No Project/No
Build
Alternative 2
No Project/
Existing
Entitlements
Alternative 3
Reduced Density
Alternative 4
The Golf/Resort
Hotel
Alternative 5
The Lake
Amenity/No
Hotel
Aesthetics
Significant and
Unavoidable
Reduced
(No Impact)
Reduced
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Similar (Significant
and Unavoidable)
Reduced
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Reduced
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Air Quality
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Reduced (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Biological
Resources
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Cultural
Resources
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Increased
(Historical
Resources)
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Energy
Less than Significant
Reduced
(No Impact)
Reduced Electricity
and Natural Gas;
Increased
Petroleum
Demand (Less than
Significant)
Reduced (Less
than Significant)
Reduced
Electricity and
Petroleum;
Increased Natural
Gas (Less than
Significant)
Reduced
Electricity and
Natural Gas;
Increased
Petroleum
Demand (Less
than Significant)
Geology and Soils
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Greenhouse Gas
Significant and
Unavoidable
Reduced
(No Impact)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Reduced (Less
than Significant)
Similar (Significant
and Unavoidable)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Hazards and
Hazardous
Materials
Less than Significant
Reduced
( No Impact)Si
Similar (Less than
Significant)
g )
Similar (Less than
Significant)Si
Similar (Less than
Significant)
g )
Similar (Less than
Significant)
g
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-72
June 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
Hydrology and
Water Quality
Less than Significant
Reduced
(No Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Land Use and
Planning
Less than Significant
Similar
(No Impact)
Reduced (No
Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Noise
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Reduced
(operational) (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Reduced (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Reduced (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Reduced (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Public Services
Less than Significant
Reduced
(No Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Reduced (Less
than Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Similar (Less than
Significant)
Transportation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Reduced (Less
than Significant
with Mitigation)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Increased
(Significant and
Unavoidable)
Tribal Cultural
Resources
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Reduced
(No Impact)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Similar (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation)
Utilities & Service
Systems
Less than Significant
Reduced
(No Impact)
Increased Water
Demand; Reduced
Electricity and
Natural Gas;
Similar Others
(Less than
Significant)
Reduced (Less
than Significant)
Increased Water
Demand; Reduced
Electricity;
Increased Natural
Gas; Similar
Others (Less than
Significant)
Increased Water
Demand; Reduced
Others (Significant
and Unavoidable)
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
7-73 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, La Quinta CA
8.0 References
Chapter 8.0 References
Chapter 3.0 Project Description
Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan, SP2020-0002, April 2021.
Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis
Section 4.1 Aesthetics
State Scenic Highways, Caltrans, website https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-
architecture-and-community-livability/lap-Iiv-i-scenic-highways, accessed April 2020.
Streets and Highways Code — SHC; Division 1. State Highways, Chapter 2. The State Highway System,
Article 2.5 State Scenic Highways, California Legislative Information,
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displayText.xhtml?IawCode=SHC&division=1.&tit
le=&part=&chapter=2.&article=2.5., accessed May 2020.
Section 4.2 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
Coral Mountain Specific Plan Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA), prepared by Urban Crossroads on
November 12, 2020 and revised on March 1, 2021
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
Section 4.3 Biological Resources
Biological Resources Assessment and CVMSHCP Consistency Analysis, LSA Associates, Inc., May 2021.
Focused Bat Survey Report, LSA Associates, Inc., May 2021.
Environmental protection Agency, May 2020 https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-
endangered-species-act, accessed 2020
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-1 June 2021
8.0 REFERENCES
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 2020 https://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/hcp-
overview.html, accessed 2020.
La Quinta General Plan, Chapter III, Natural Resources Element, accessed 2020.
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 2019 Annual Report, accessed 2020.
Section 4.4 Cultural Resources
City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter III, Natural Resource Element, November 2013.
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech, October
2019, revised May 2021.
Section 4.5 Energy Resources
CARB, EMFAC2017 Web Database, accessed June 2020, available at https://arb.ca.Rov/emfac/
California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, California Energy Commission, Demand Analysis
Office, February 2018, accessed May 2020.
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, accessed May 2020.
California Energy Commission (CEC), California Energy Consumption Database, "Electricity Consumption
by Planning Area", accessed May 2020 http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyplan.aspx
Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator — Calculations and References, Environmental Protection
Agency, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-
and-references, accessed August 2020.
Integrated Resource Plan, Imperial Irrigation District, November 2018,
https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9280/636927586520070000, accessed
April 2021.
Natural Gas and California, California Public Utilities Commission,
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural gs/, accessed August 2020.
Service Area Plan 2020, Imperial Irrigation District, October 2020,
https://www.iid.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18842, accessed April 2021.
Section 4.6 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.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-2 June 2021
8.0 REFERENCES
Geotechnical Investigation Andalusia West Side Development, La Quinta, California, Sladden
Engineering, February 2019.
Paleontological Resources Assessment Report, Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech, October 2019.
Section 4.7 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 2017, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, 2019
Edition, California Air Resources Board; Release No. 18-37 & 19-35, California Air Resources Board
Press Release, July 2018 and August 2019
Coral Mountain Specific Plan Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHGA), prepared by Urban Crossroads on
November 12, 2020 and revised on March 1, 2021
Federal Clean Air Act (CWA)
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
Section 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
GeoTracker, State Water Resources Control Board, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ accessed
July 2020.
EnviroStor, Department of Toxic Substance Control, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/,
accessed July 2020.
Enforcement and Compliance History, Environmental Protection Agency,
https://echo.epa.gov/facilities/facility-search/results, accessed July 2020.
Section 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Coral Mountain Resort Specific Plan Master Hydrology Report, MSA Consulting, January of 2021
Coral Mountain Project -Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, MSA Consulting, June 1,
2020
Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification, Coral Mountain Specific Plan, MSA Consulting.
Approved in its revised form on September 29, 2020.
City of La Quinta Master Drainage Plan, March 2009, available at
https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8523/635338594527270000
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-3 June 2021
8.0 REFERENCES
City of La Quinta General Plan 2017, Flooding and Hydrology Section of the Environmental Hazards
Element (Chapter 4), February 2013, available at
https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/33565/636340814687270000
Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Environmental Protection Agency, available at
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panels 06065C2244H
and 06065C2900H effective April 19, 2017, and 06065C2925H, effective March 6, 2018, available
at https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
Indio Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Plan, available at
http://www.indiosubbasinsgma.org/
Oasis/Valley Floor Area Stormwater Master Plan, part of the Eastern Coachella Valley Stormwater
Master Plan, April 2015, available at http://www.cvwd.org/374/Eastern-Coachella-Valley-
Stormwater-Mast
Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Basin Plan), January 2019, available at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/coloradoriver/water issues/programs/basin planning/docs/
2020/rb7bp e2019.pdf
Whitewater River Region Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff and the associated
Whitewater River Watershed MS4 Permit, effective June 20, 2013, available at
https://content.rcflood.org/downloads/NPDES/Documents/WW SWMP WQMP/Jan2015 App
B MS4Permit.pdf
2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management and Stormwater Resources Plan,
December 2018, available at https://dwa.org/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/integrated-
regional-water-management-plan/2019/06/2019 04 03 CVRWMG-Fina120181RWMSWR-
Plan 160437-compressed.pdf
Section 4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan Chapter II, Land Use Element, November 2013, accessed 2020.
La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, Zoning, accessed 2020.
Section 4.11 Noise
Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., March 2021.
The Wave at Coral Mountain Noise Memorandum, Urban Crossroads, Inc. April 2021.
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-
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-4 June 2021
8.0 REFERENCES
innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-
0123 0.pdf, accessed August 2020.
Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation,
September 2013, available at
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34120/Caltrans-2013-construction-
vibration-PDF?bidld= accessed August 2020.
Section 4.14 Public Services
California Department of Parks and Recreation, Quimby Act, 2020.
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
Resolution No. 2020-003; Revised Final Draft Report Development Impact Fee Study, City of La Quinta,
September 2019; adopted February 2020.
2020 CVUSD Fee Justification Study for New Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development, May
5, 2018.
Section 4.13 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 4.14 Tribal Cultural Resources
California Native American Heritage Commission http://nahc.ca.gov/ accessed July 2020.
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Coral Mountain Specific Plan, CRM Tech, October
2019, revised May 2021.
Section 4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
CalRecylce Estimated Solid Wase Generation Rates, CalRecycle,
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates#Residential accessed
August 2020.
City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Chapter V, Public Infrastructure and Services, Riverside County EIR
No. 52, Public Facilities, Section 4.17.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-5 June 2021
8.0 REFERENCES
Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water and Management Planning Website
http://cvwd.org/543/Urban-Water-Management-Planning accessed July and August 2020.
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.rctIma.org/Portals/14/genplan/general plan 2015/DEIR%20521/04-
17 PublicFacilities.pdf, accessed August 2020.
Environmental Protection Agency, RecycleMania Volume -to -Weight Conversion Chart
https://arch ive.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/tools/rogo/web/pdf/volume-weight-conversions.pdf,
accessed March 2021.
Riverside County Department of Waste Resources https://www.rcwaste.org/business/planning/ciwmp
accessed August 2020.
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
8-6 June 2021
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Coral Mountain Resort, 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
ADT Average Daily Traffic
AFY Acre -Feet per Year
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
ANSI American National Standards Institute
APSA Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
BACM Best Available Dust Control Measures
BGS Below Ground Surface
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BMP Best Management Practices
BOR Bureau of Reclamation
BTU British Thermal Unit
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CALGreen California's Green Building Standards
CaIEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CaIEEMod California Emissions Estimator Modell"'
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-1 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Officers Association
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCA Community Choice Aggregation
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(Superfund)
CERT Community Emergency Response Team
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
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board
CMA Congestion Management Agency
CMP Congestion Management Plan
CMS Congestion Management System
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
CPP Clean Power Plan
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-2 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
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
CVMC Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy
CVMSHCP Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural
Community 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
CVWMP Coachella Valley Water Management Plan
CWA Clean Water Act
CWA Coachella Water Authority
DA Development Agreement
dBA A -weighted decibel
DBE Design Basis Earthquake
DEH Riverside County Department of Environmental Health
DOF Department of Finance
DOSH Division of Occupational Safety and Health
DOT United States Department of Transportation
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
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-3 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
DWQ Department of Water Quality
EAP Energy Action Plan
ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Online
EIC Eastern Information Center
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EMS Emergency Medical Services
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act
ePlan Rancho Mirage Energy Action Plan
EPO Environmental Protection and Oversight Division
°F Fahrenheit (degrees)
FAA Federal Aviation Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FERC the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FESA Endangered Species Act
FHSZ in SRA Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Areas
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FRAP Fire and Resources Assessment Program
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FTE Full Time Equivalent
GCC Global Climate Change
GHG greenhouse gas
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GLO U.S. General Land Office
GPA General Plan Amendment
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-4 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
GPS Global Positioning System
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GWh Gigawatt Hours
HCP Habitat Conservation Plans
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
HFC Hydrofluorocarbons
HHW Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program
HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program
HSC Health and Safety Code
HWCL Hazardous Waste Control Law
Hz Hertz
1-10 Interstate 10
IID Imperial Irrigation District
ISO Independent System Operator
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Acts of 1991
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
IWA Indio Water Authority
LAQMP Local Air Quality Management Plan
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of Service
LQGP La Quinta General Plan
LQMP La Quinta Municipal Code
LST Local Significance Threshold
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-5 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
mgd Million Gallons Per Day
MHFP Rancho Mirage Multi -Hazard Functional Plan
Mmax Maximum Moment Magnitude
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
MW Moment Magnitude
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NaCIO Sodium Hypochlorite
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NETR Nationwide Environmental Title Research
NFA National Fire Academy
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NHMLAC Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NIFC National Interagency Fire Center
NIMS National Incident Management System
NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOI Notice of Intent
NOP Notice of Preparation
NOx Nitrogen Oxide
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
03 Ozone
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-6 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OES Office of Emergency Services
ONAC Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control
OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PA Planning Area
Pb Lead
PDP Preliminary Development Plan
PFC perfluorocarbons
PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
PM10/ PM2.5 Particulate Matter (10 Microns / 2.5 Microns)
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
PWS Public Water System
RCDWR Riverside County Department of Waste Resources
RCFC&WCD Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
RCFD Riverside County Fire Department
RCMJLHMP Riverside County Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission
REMEL Reference Energy Mean Emission Level
Reservation Agua Caliente Indian Reservation
RFS Renewable Fuel Standard
RIVTAM Riverside Transportation Analysis Model
RMEA Rancho Mirage Energy Authority
RMGP Rancho Mirage General Plan
RMMC Rancho Mirage Municipal Code
RMS Root Mean Squared
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-7 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ROG Reactive Organic Gas
RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWCQB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SBCM San Bernardino County Museum
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE Southern California Edison
SCM Seismic Coefficient Method
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SDP Site Development Plan
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SEMS Standardized Emergency Manamgent System
SERC State Emergency Response Commission
SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
SHMP California State Hazard Mitigation Plan
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
SIP State Implementation Plans
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SOI Sphere of Influence
SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company)
SOX Sulfur Oxides
SP Specific Plan
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-8 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
SPL Sound Pressure Level
SRA Source Receptor Areas
SRI Statistical Research, Inc.
SSAB Salton Sea Air Basin
SSMP Sanitary Sewer Management Plan
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAM Transportation Assessment Memo
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TCR Tribal Cultural Resources
TEA -21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
TIP Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan
THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
TOT Transit Occupancy Tax
TPPS Transportation Project Priority Study
TRB Transportation Research Board
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
TTM Tentative Tract Map
TUA Traditional Use Area
TUMF Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
TUP Temporary Use Permit
UBC Uniform Building Code
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFA United States Fire Administration
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-9 June 2021
9.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
USGBC United States Green Building Council
USGS United States Geological Survey
UST Underground Storage Tank
UWMPA Urban Water Management Planning Act
VdB Vibration Level
VHFSZ in LRA Very High Fire Severity Zone in Local Responsibility Areas
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
WDID Waste Discharge Identification
WGCEP Working Group of California Earthquake Probabilities
WRPs Water Reclamation Plants
WSA Water Supply Assessment
WSV Water Supply Verification
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
ZC Zone Change
Coral Mountain Resort Draft EIR
Page 9-10 June 2021