HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-05-21 2nd Review - CEQA Exemption DocumentMSA CO
Civil Engineering • L
Planning • Environme
May 21, 2026
Ms. Jill West
NSULTING, INC.
a
nd Surveying • Landscape Architecture
ntal Services • Dry Utility Coordination • CIS
Pyramid Global Hospitality dba Pyramid Hotel Group
30 Rowes Wharf, Suite 5300
Boston, MA 02110
Subject: California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Notice of Exemption ("NOE")
Dear Ms. West:
MSA Consulting, Inc. ("MSA") has prepared this letter on behalf of Pyramid Global Hospitality to
respond to Item 4 of the City of La Quinta's Revised Second Incomplete Letter dated March 19,
2026, which required (among other requests): (1) an analysis of CEQA Guidelines Section
15300.2; and (2) a demonstration that the proposed project will have no indirect impact on the
Walter H. Morgan House. This letter establishes that the proposed La Quinta Resort Family
Pool renovation (the "Project") qualifies for a categorical exemption from CEQA, no exception to
the exemption applies, and the Project will have no direct or indirect adverse effect on the
Morgan House as a historical resource.
Project Background
MSA has reviewed the Project site, which is an existing, recreational pool area with support
facilities within the La Quinta Resort (the "Resort"). The property is approximately one acre of land
(APNs 658-161-055), located within the La Quinta Resort in the City of La Quinta (the "City"). The
site of the proposed Project is located primarily in an existing and main pool area which will be
demolished and replaced. The Project area also encompasses portions of adjacent existing
recreational court (pickleball) areas and portions of their associated fencing to the west of the
existing pool, all of which are previously disturbed, fully developed surfaces with no remaining
natural habitat value. The existing restroom facilities to the southwest will be remodeled to current
CBC codes and existing ground mounted mechanical equipment and yard enclosures to the
southwest will be removed. The proposed pool site is surrounded by an existing structure (the
Walter H. Morgan House, or the "Morgan House") to the north, a paved street to the east (Avenida
Obregon), and pickleball and tennis courts (and associated structures) to the west and south.
The Morgan House is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
("NRHP")/California Register of Historical Resources ("CRHR") and is eligible for the Local
Register, defining it as a historic resource under CEQA pursuant to 14 California Code of
Regulations ("CCR") § 15064.5(a)(2). According to the Historic Resource Assessment, completed
in May 2026 by SRI Statistical Research, Inc. ("SRI") (Attachment A), the proposed Project will
not cause any direct or indirect effect on the significance or integrity of the Morgan House, as
further discussed below.
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 2
May 21, 2026
The property has a General Plan Land Use designation of Tourist Commercial and is zoned
Tourist Commercial -Hotel ("CT") by the City's Zoning map. The CT zone is established to
accommodate tourism -related uses, including resort hotels, hotels and motels, and resort
commercial developments, as well as related accessory uses (Chapter 9.8). The proposed
renovated pool facility location is encompassed by the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan, which
designates the property under a land use of Tourist Commercial ("TC-RSP").
The Project proposes the renovation of the Family Pool area within the Resort. The proposed
Family Pool Renovation is designed to modernize one of the Resort's key amenities. The
proposed updated design includes new recreational water elements such as a water slide, a kid -
sized pool with beach entry, splash zones, and interactive play structures, along with expanded
cabanas, a larger lounging area, and integrated shade structures. The existing kitchen and bar
will continue to support the pool, providing convenient poolside access to food and beverage
service. The pool offers several child -friendly elements such as shallow play zones, splash areas,
and easy access points, making it well suited for young children and families. The existing bar
and kitchen provide the added convenience of poolside dining and shaded seating that is not
available elsewhere on the property for children. The Family Pool is a guest -only amenity
available exclusively to registered Resort guests. No additional public access is permitted. The
current and proposed hours of operation for the Family Pool will be 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM year-
round, and the proposed hours of operation for the proposed slide will be 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM
year-round.
CEQA Exemptions
CEQA provides several categorical exemptions which are applicable to categories of projects and
activities that the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency has determined generally do not
pose a risk of significant impacts on the environment. The Project is exempt under Section
15332, 15301, 15302, 15303, and 15323 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Class 32 In -fill
Development, Class 1 Existing Facilities, Class 2 Replacement or Reconstruction, Class
3(e) New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, and Class 23 Normal Operations
of Facilities for Public Gatherings respectively).
The Project meets the conditions for the Section 15332 Class 32 In -fill Development
exemption, as explained below:
The Project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation, applicable policies,
and applicable zoning designation and regulations: The Project site is designated as Tourist
Commercial by the City's Land Use map and CT by the City's Zoning map. The CT zone was
established to accommodate tourism -related uses, including resort hotels, hotels and motels, and
resort commercial developments. The proposed pool Project is permitted because the property is
within the CT Tourist Commercial District, which is intended for tourist- and resort -oriented
commercial uses, including "destination resort hotels," hotels/motels, accessory services, and
recreational uses; permitted uses in CT are governed by the City's municipal code § 9.70.070
and Chapter 9.80. Under § 9.80.020, Table 9-5, "hotels and motels" are a permitted ("P") use
in the CT zone, and "swimming pools as an accessory use" are allowed as an accessory ("A")
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 3
May 21, 2026
use in CT. This means that the pool is subordinate and incidental to the existing resort hotel use
rather than a new principal use. The Project should therefore be processed as a
permitted/accessory improvement, subject to applicable development standards and review
requirements. The Project's proposed Family Pool redevelopment will also be developed in a
manner that is consistent with the City's CT development standards and applicable district
standards, as identified in Chapter 9.70 and Chapter 9.90 of the City's Zoning Code. As stated
above, the permitted uses outlined in Chapter 9.80 indicate that swimming pools are allowed as
an accessory use within the CT District. The Family Pool is also consistent with the land use
designated by the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan, which designates the property under a TC-
RSP land use, which contemplates recreational pool facilities as a permitted amenity and
accessory use. The City will require design review to ensure the design and quality of the
development is consistent with City standards.
➢ The proposed development occurs within City limits on a project site of no
more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses: The proposed redevelopment
Project occurs within the City limits of La Quinta on approximately one acre and is less than the
maximum five acres. The site is surrounded by existing resort uses.
➢ The Project site has no habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species:
The site had previously been completely developed and cleared of native vegetation and used as
a pool within the existing Resort for over 40 years. The Project site consists of an existing
swimming pool and associated facilities, as well as adjacent recreational court areas to the west
and south, all of which are fully encompassed by surrounding resort and recreational uses. The
east side of the Project includes a paved sidewalk and a street (Avenida Obregon), and the Project
is surrounded on the north, south, and west by accompanying recreational facilities. The Project
site is located in an area of the City with tourist commercial land uses. Due to the developed and
previously disturbed condition of the Project site and the existing surrounding resort uses and
development, the Project property does not provide suitable or sensitive habitat for special status
species and has no value for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
➢ Approval of the Project would not result in significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality: The Project is proposing an upgrade and
modernization of an existing Resort pool into a Family Pool. As discussed previously, the site is
fully developed and has functioned as an existing swimming pool within the La Quinta Resort as
far back as 1982, according to City planning documents and historic aerial imagery. The Project
is consistent with the City's existing CT Land Use designation for the site. The proposed Project
does not expand the Resort's room count, public access, or occupancy, and therefore does not
materially increase the intensity of Resort operations beyond the existing entitled resort use.
Traffic
As the proposed renovation Project will serve the existing users and guests already at the
Resort, the Project will not result in a net increase in traffic. Per the La Quinta Resort & Club Cup
2025-0004 Parking Justification Memorandum ("Parking Memo"), prepared in May 2026 by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. ("UXR") (Attachment B), the proposed pool renovations will not increase trips or
parking demand because the facilities will only be accessible to La Quinta Resort guests. The
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com�
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 4
May 21, 2026
Institute of Transportation Engineers ("ITE") Trip Generation Manual (12th Edition, 2025) and
Parking Generation Manual (6th Edition, 2023) classify this facility under ITE Land Use Code 330
— Resort Hotel, under which the pool and all other resort amenities are ancillary uses. Data
related to trip and parking generation are calculated based on the number of rooms provided on -
site; because the Project does not include an increase in room count, the trip and parking
generation associated with the renovated pool is calculated to be zero. A fully occupied Resort
will generate the same number of trips and parking demand with or without the proposed
renovations, serving the same fixed guest population. There is no anticipated expansion of use
or intensity. Per the Resort's Statement of Operations, guests will continue to access the pool
primarily via pedestrian pathways connecting their guestrooms to the pool area. To further support
circulation throughout the property, the Resort provides a 24-hour golf cart valet service, providing
on -demand transportation for guest drop-off and pick-up at all pool locations. This service is
widely utilized and facilitates guest movement without relying on additional vehicle use or parking.
Because the Resort's existing capacity will not change and because the golf cart valet service will
continue, the proposed Project will not change or increase established guest travel patterns within
the Resort.
Noise
As previously stated, the upgrade and modernization of the existing facilities will not
change the land use or materially increase the intensity of Resort operations beyond the existing
entitled resort use. The proposed Family Pool is not designed to operate as a public attraction or
tourism -generating amenity independent of the Resort's existing guest base and is not expected
to draw additional guests to the Resort; the proposed pool is simply an upgrade to an existing
facility, and the proposed pool is smaller in scale than the larger or more complex pool and
waterpark features at other resorts in the region. Therefore, noise levels will not increase from
previous levels.
A noise impact study was prepared by MD Acoustics, LLC in May 2026 (Attachment C).'
The study states that based on the results of the Parking Memo, the noise impact to off -site
sensitive receptors due to Project traffic will be less than significant. It also indicates that Project
operational noise will remain within the City's noise limits, including hours of operation and
sensitive receptor thresholds, and the impact will be less than significant. Construction noise will
have a temporary or periodic increase in the ambient noise level above those existing within the
Project vicinity but is considered a short-term impact and will occur within the times allowed by
the City's Municipal Code. The impact of construction noise is considered less than significant.
Vibration impacts to off -site receptors were also deemed to be less than significant. A sensitive
receptor, as defined by CEQA, is a facility or location that houses or attracts individuals who are
particularly vulnerable to the effects of environmental hazards. Per the CEQA definition, the
Morgan House does not qualify as a sensitive receptor because it is uninhabited. According to
' The Noise Study and the Parking Justification Memorandum are complementary and mutually reinforcing: the
Parking Memo establishes that the renovation generates zero net new external trips because the facility serves only
existing registered Resort guests, while the Noise Study independently confirms this conclusion through
conservative traffic noise modeling using Average Daily Traffic ("ADT") data from the La Quinta Resort Traffic
Study (UXR, 2009).
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 5
May 21, 2026
the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (Table 8 of the
Noise Study — Attachment C), "Historic and Old Buildings" have a vibration damage potential
threshold of 0.5 PPV at 25 feet for "transient activity", such as construction. The primary vibration
source during construction may be from a vibratory roller. A vibratory roller has a vibration impact
of 0.21 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below
any risk to architectural damage. Vibratory rollers are primarily used for large areas, access road
areas and structural slabs and use weight and vibration. Plate compactor equipment is used for
hardscape features and smaller confined spaces and use only vibration (with much lower mass)
and would be used in direct proximity to the Morgan House due to limited space and proposed
improvements. Plate compactors are commonly used for recreational pool areas due to their
smaller size, higher maneuverability and lower PPV. Large construction equipment commonly
associated with vibratory impacts such as pile drivers will not be utilized. The Noise report
indicates there will be no direct or indirect effect to the structure. This, combined with the location
of the site in a tourist district surrounded by resort uses, presents no evidence that noise impacts
would reach substantial levels.
Air Qualitv
The Project is located in a developed area of La Quinta. Currently, all areas surrounding
the property are fully developed and operational. All projects greater than 5,000 square feet are
subject to preparation and implementation of a Local Air Quality Management Plan for the City.
The Local Air Quality Management Plan addresses physical improvements and Best
Management Practices ("BMPs") during construction that mitigate any offsite release of surface
pollutants from the property. Moreover, because the Project is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use designation, it is also considered consistent with the regional Air Quality Management
Plan and therefore would not generate significant air quality emissions. The Air Quality
Management Plan requires regular compliance reporting.
Water Quality
The Project would comply with the Coachella Valley Water District's stormwater
requirements, which would prevent impacts to local receiving waters and avoid violations to the
established water quality standards and waste discharge requirements.
➢ The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public
services: The City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") analyzed the provision
of public services and utilities for all properties within the City consistent with General Plan land
uses and determined that build -out would be adequately served without creating significant
impacts. Moreover, the site has operated as a Resort pool since 1982 and is located within the
existing La Quinta Resort, which presently is fully served by existing utilities and public services.
The Project does not require any new utility infrastructure connections, expanded utility
infrastructure connections, or extensions of public services beyond those currently serving the
Resort. On -site connections to the necessary utilities and provision for public services would be
routine and would not result in adverse impacts to the affected service providers. In addition,
Project improvements would include routine modernization of certain existing systems, including
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 6
May 21, 2026
lighting, HVAC, and pool equipment, which would be replaced with current, more efficient
equipment where applicable.
Additional Applicable CEQA Exemptions
The Project also meets the conditions for the Section 15301 Class 1 Existing Facilities
exemption, as explained below:
➢ The key consideration for this exemption is whether the Project will involve negligible or
no expansion of use. The Project involves the renovation and modernization of an
existing private recreational facility — the Family Pool and associated amenities —
within a fully developed Resort campus that has operated continuously since at least
1982. Because the Family Pool will remain exclusively available to registered Resort
guests, with no new rooms proposed and no expansion of the guest population, there is
no expansion of the intensity of use beyond existing Resort operations. The renovation
does not materially increase the intensity of Resort operations beyond the existing
entitled resort use. The Project therefore qualifies for the Class 1 exemption.
The Project also meets the conditions for the Section 15302 Class 2 Replacement or
Reconstruction exemption, as explained below:
➢ Section 15302 exempt projects are described as those involving the replacement or
reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located
on the same site as the replaced structure and will have substantially the same purpose
and capacity as the replaced structure. The Project involves replacement and
reconstruction of existing pool improvements and associated structures with new facilities
within the same previously developed area, and therefore represents a replacement and
reconstruction that squarely falls within this exemption category.
With respect to the requirement that the replacement facility have "substantially the same
purpose and capacity" as the replaced structure: the purpose of the facility — providing a
pool amenity exclusively for registered Resort guests — is entirely unchanged. As to
capacity, the operative measure of capacity for this guest -exclusive facility is the number
of users the facility can serve at any given time, which is constrained not by the physical
dimensions of the pool but by the fixed Resort guest population. Because no increase in
room count is proposed and no public access is permitted, the demand -side capacity of
the facility is unchanged regardless of any modification to the physical pool area.
Accordingly, the functional capacity of the facility — measured by the guest population it
serves — is substantially the same as the structure it replaces, and the Class 2 exemption
applies.
The Project further meets the conditions for the Section 15303 Class 3(e) New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures exemption, as explained below:
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 7
May 21, 2026
➢ The Class 3 exemption consists of the construction and location of a limited number of
new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small
structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where
only minor exterior modifications are involved. Swimming pools are expressly included
under subsection (e), which covers accessory (appurtenant) structures such as garages,
carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences. The Project will involve only minor
alterations and modernization of an existing swimming pool and associated amenities.
Thus, the Class 3 exemption applies.
Finally, the Project meets the conditions for the Section 15323 — Normal Operations of
Facilities for Public Gathering exemption, as explained below:
➢ Class 23 consists of the normal operations of existing facilities for public gatherings for
which the facilities were designed, where there is a past history of the facility being used
for the same or similar kind of purpose. For the purposes of this section, "past history"
shall mean that the same or similar kind of activity has been occurring for at least three
years and that there is a reasonable expectation that the future occurrence of the activity
would not represent a change in the operation of the facility. Facilities included within this
exemption include, but are not limited to, racetracks, stadiums, convention centers,
auditoriums, amphitheaters, planetariums, swimming pools, and amusement parks. As
stated, the Project will involve modernization of an existing swimming pool area and
associated amenities that have been in operation for approximately 40 years.
Exceptions to CEQA Categorical Exemptions
As a general rule, when a project comes within a categorical exemption under CEQA, no
environmental review is required. However, there are exceptions to CEQA exemptions. Thus,
the Project was analyzed under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, which details exceptions to
CEQA Categorical Exemptions. No exceptions were noted for the proposed Project, as detailed
below.
➢ Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the
project is to be located: a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the
environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore,
these classes do not apply where the project may impact an environmental
resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and
officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. As previously
detailed, the Project does not occur in a sensitive environment and is located within an
already developed area. The Project will involve the renovation and modernization of an
existing swimming pool and associated amenities. The Project is located in an urbanized
area categorized by the Land Use designation of Tourist Commercial and is zoned as CT
district, both of which are designated for tourism and resort uses. Therefore, an exemption
is warranted and appropriate, and no exception applies.
The Morgan House — a historical resource as defined under 14 CCR § 15064.5(a)(2) —
is located immediately adjacent to the Project site. Notwithstanding this proximity, as
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 8
May 21, 2026
detailed in the Historic Resource Assessment prepared by SRI (Attachment A) and as
further discussed under the Historical Resources exception below, the proposed Project
will not cause any direct or indirect effect on the significance or integrity of the Morgan
House. The south and east lawns of the Morgan House, where most of the Project -related
construction will occur, are not contributing factors to the Morgan House's historic
significance. The proposed construction will not interrupt the existing line of sight to the
Morgan House from Avenida Obregon. Accordingly, the Project does not occur in a
sensitive environment within the meaning of Section 15300.2(a), and the Location
exception does not apply. Therefore, an exemption is warranted and appropriate.
➢ Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the
cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over
time, is significant. The Project is consistent with the Section 15332 Class 32 In -fill
Development exemption due to its consistency with the General Plan Lands Use
Designations and zoning and because it is fully encompassed by surrounding resort and
recreational uses. The Project proposes minor alterations and modernization of an existing
swimming pool and associated amenities within an already built -out resort community.
Due to the built -out nature of the surrounding properties, successive projects are
improbable, and thus cumulative impacts will not be substantial. Therefore, an exemption
is warranted and appropriate.
➢ Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where
there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the
environment due to unusual circumstances. The Project proposes minor alterations
and modernization of an existing swimming pool and associated amenities within an
already built -out resort community. No unusual circumstances were identified, and
therefore, an exemption is warranted and appropriate.
➢ Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which
may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees,
historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway
officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to
improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration
or certified EIR. The Project does not occur near a scenic highway. According to the
California Department of Transportation, Highway 74 is the nearest officially designated
scenic highway and occurs approximately 5.5 miles west of the Project and therefore, an
exemption is warranted and appropriate. A historic building, the Morgan House, is located
adjacent to the proposed Family Pool. However, according to the Historic Resource
Assessment (Attachment A), the proposed Project will not have a direct or indirect effect
on the historical resource's significance or integrity. Therefore, the Scenic highways
exception does not apply to the proposed Project.
➢ Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project
located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5
of the Government Code. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances
Control, no hazardous waste sites occur on or near the Project site.
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 9
May 21, 2026
➢ Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which
may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
As previously stated, the Project will occur adjacent to the Morgan House. The CEQA
Guidelines define a "substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical
resource" as physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or
its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be
materially impaired (14 CCR § 15064.5(b)(1)). However, as detailed in the Historic
Resource Assessment (Attachment A), the planned Project poses no direct or indirect
effect on the characteristics that qualify the Morgan House as a historical resource
because the undertaking will not result in the "substantial adverse change in the
significance of an historical resource." The proposed Project involves none of the actions
— physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the Morgan House or its
character -defining features — that constitute a substantial adverse change. Construction
will occur exclusively in areas that SRI has confirmed are not contributing factors to the
Morgan House's historic significance.
Potential Direct Effects: According to the SRI Assessment, the south and east lawns, the
location of most of the relevant construction plans, have not been contributing factors to
significance that have led to the present historic status. Additionally, according to archival
photographs of the Morgan House (ca. 1947-1959), the design, materials, workmanship,
and overall feeling of the south and east lawns had changed significantly by the time the
property was first recommended eligible in 1997. The assessment states that
modifications over time included changes in arboreal curation, the addition of the brick
wall lining Avenida Obregon, and the removal of a paved walking path. Additionally, by
the time of a 2022 evaluation, approximately half of the east lawn had been converted into
astroturf for use as a croquet court. As of the date of SRI's visit to the property in April
2026, most of the south lawn had already been converted into an area of amenities
included in the Main Pool area. None of these previous alterations to the east or south
lawns impacted the significance of the Morgan House because the south and east lawns
are not contributing factors to the building's historic significance. Therefore, the proposed
construction plans will not have a direct effect on the Morgan House.
Potential Indirect Effects: The planned extension of the pool, addition of ADA-compliant
paths, and construction of cabanas will not impact the line of sight to the Morgan House
from Avenida Obregon. The SRI Assessment further confirms that neither the new
restroom/pool-equipment building nor the new kids' water -play tower is positioned in a
manner that would interrupt the existing line of sight from Avenida Obregon to the Morgan
House. Additionally, the Assessment states that indirect effects typically associated with
historical properties in similar recreational or social environments that attract visitors (such
as vandalism or modern trash dumping) are mitigated by the supervision, maintenance,
and caretaking of the La Quinta Resort & Club staff who will be present throughout hours
of operation. As previously stated, the Morgan House does not qualify as a sensitive
receptor under CEQA because it is uninhabited. However, vibration impacts to the Morgan
House are anticipated to be less than significant due to the Vibration Damage Potential
Threshold cited in the Noise Study as well as the use of equipment appropriate for smaller
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Notice of Exemption (NOE)
111 & Adams Street — La Quinta, CA
Page 10
May 21, 2026
construction projects such as the proposed Project. This analysis indicates that the
proposed construction plans will not have an indirect effect on the Morgan House.
Therefore, an exemption is warranted and appropriate.
Overall, this analysis indicates that the proposed construction plans will not have a direct
or indirect effect on the Morgan House. Although the Morgan House is a historical resource
under 14 CCR § 15064.5, the proposed Project will not have a direct or indirect effect on
the significance or integrity of the historical resource and therefore does not result in a
"substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource" within the
meaning of 14 CCR § 15064.5(b)(1). The proposed Project thus does not meet the
Historical Resources exception as defined in 14 CCR § 15300.2(f). An exemption is
warranted and appropriate.
Conclusion
Based upon the reasoning provided in this letter, and the supporting assessments attached
hereto, the Project qualifies for a categorical exemption from CEQA under Sections 15332, 15301,
15302, and 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. No exception to these exemptions under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. In particular, the Project will not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of the Walter H. Morgan House as a historical resource. No further
CEQA analysis is required, unless the proposed Project plans undergo changes not described in
this letter.
We would be glad to provide any other information if needed. We can be reached at 760-320-
9811.
Very truly yours,
Michelle Witherspoon
Director of Environmental Services
Attachment A - Historic Resource Assessment, Prepared by SRI
Attachment B - Parking Memo, Prepared by Urban Crossroads
Attachment C - Noise Study, Prepared by MD Acoustics
34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 1 760.320.9811 1 msaconsultinginc.com
ATTACHMENT A
NA.16**
S R I
Statistical Research, Inc.
May 5, 2026
Jill West
Vice President, Project Management
Pyramid Global Hospitality
30 Rowes Wharf
Suite 530
Boston, MA 02110
RE: Historic Morgan House Assessment, La Quinta, Riverside County, California (SRI Technical
Report 26-27)
Dear Ms. West,
Pyramid Global, the owners of La Quinta Resort & Club, has proposed the La Quinta Resort & Club: Family
Pool in the City of La Quinta in Riverside County, California, project. As part of the approval process, the
City of La Quinta has requested that MSA Consulting, Inc. (MSA), demonstrate that the planned project
would have no indirect impact on Walter H. Morgan House as well as address California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines under 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) 15300.2. Following this
request, MSA contacted Statistical Research, Inc. (SRI), to investigate and determine if documentation of
the historic status of the Morgan House and an assessment of the impacts of the planned project on the
building's status would be helpful for this purpose. SRI sent Architectural Historian Patrick D. O'Rourke,
M.A., to assess the property on April 26, 2026. Mr. O'Rourke worked closely with Teresita Majewski,
Ph.D., the director of SRI's Historic Program, to prepare this letter, which is a summary of
recommendations regarding the planned project and an analysis of potential effects according to 14 CCR
15300.2.
The CEQA Guidelines defines any projects that have been determined to "not have a significant effect
on the environment" as Categorical Exemptions, which "shall ... be exempt from the provisions of CEQA"
(14 CCR 15300). Circumstances that would be exceptions that would prevent a project from being
considered a Categorical Exemption are listed in 14 CCR 15300.2. These circumstances include a project
occurring in a sensitive location, a project with the potential for a significant cumulative impact, a project
that has been found to have a significant effect, any project which may result in damage to significant
resources, any project located on hazardous waste sites, or any project which may cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource (Association of Environmental Professionals
[AEP] 2021:288).
The area of potential effects is adjacent to one property that appears eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP)/California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and is eligible for
the Local Register (California Department of Parks and Recreation [DPR] 2022). SRI recommends that this
project has no direct or indirect effect on the Walter H. Morgan House, 49401 Avenida Obregon
(Building B1). An overall finding of no direct or indirect effect is recommended for this project, and SRI
recommends that the planned project be considered a Categorical Exemption.
SRICRM.COM
617 Texas St., Redlands, CA 92374 • P.O. Box 390, Redlands, CA 92373 441
ARIZONA • CALIFORNIA • COLORADO • NEW MEXICO • WASHINGTON i^'
Project Location and Resource Status
The planned project is located at the current site of the La Quinta Resort & Club's Main Pool, located
adjacent to 49401 Avenida Obregon, La Quinta, CA 92253 (Houston/Tyner 2026).
Presently Building B 1's status is listed as 3S/3CS/552, meaning the property appears eligible for listing
in the NRHP/CRHR and is eligible for listing in the Local Register as an individual property and is not
considered part of a historic district. The property is eligible for listing in the Local Register under
Criterion A for its significance to community development and planning in the City of La Quinta. The
property appears eligible for listing in the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2 and is eligible under Local
Criterion B for its association with Walter H. Morgan. Although it previously appeared eligible for listing
under NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3 and was eligible under Local Criterion C for embodying the distinctive
characteristics of early twentieth-century Spanish Colonial Revival —style architecture, the 2022 evaluation
has retracted this recommendation, citing a loss of integrity resulting from significant alterations to the
home (DPR 2022; O'Connor and Roth 1997; Trotoux 2012).
The historical significance of Building B 1 is defined by the primary two-story residence, a free-
standing garage to the northwest, a free-standing building to the west, and a cruciform planter box in the
formal garden (DPR 2022).
Collectively, this means that Building B 1 is defined as a historical resource under CEQA, pursuant to
14 California Code of Regulations 15064.5(a)(2):
A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in section
5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource
survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the public Resources Code, shall be
presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such
resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not
historically or culturally significant [AEP 2021:176].
Description of Planned Project's Potential to Impact to the Site
The planned project involves the remodeling and expansion of the present main pool into a family pool.
The project -related construction adjacent to Building B 1 includes a new restroom/pool-equipment building
and an extension of the present pool adjacent to Building B 1's eastern elevation, as well as the construction
of new cabanas adjacent to Building B1's eastern and southern elevations. The new restroom/pool-
equipment building will be built according to California Building Code (CBC) requirements. The extension
of the pool will feature a new kids' water -play tower. These developments will feature Americans with
Disabilities Act— (ADA-) compliant paths of travel through these areas, with a maximum 5 percent grade.
The development also will feature the addition of foliage consistent with the character of the property,
including palm trees. However, this foliage will not involve any modification to the gardens associated with
Building B 1 (Houston/Tyner 2026). Additionally, this planned project does not involve any changes to
Building B 1 as the property is defined in evaluations of historic significance in DPR (2022), O'Connor and
Roth (1997), and Trotoux (2012).
Definition of Effect According to CEQA
According to 14 CCR 15358, "effects" and "impacts" are synonymous as used in the CEQA Guidelines,
and is defined as follows:
(a) Effects include:
(1) Direct or primary effects which are caused by the project and occur at the same
time and place.
2
(2) Indirect or secondary effects which are caused by the project and are later in time
or farther removed in distance but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect or
secondary effects may include growth -inducing effects and other effects related to
induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density, or growth rate, and
related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems.
(b) Effects analyzed under CEQA must be related to a physical change [14 CCR 15358;
AEP 2021:302].
Additionally, the CEQA Guidelines states "a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the
environment" (14 CCR 15064.5[b]). This guidelines also define a "substantial adverse change" as the
"physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings
such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired" (14 CCR 15064.5[b][1];
AEP 2021:177).
Effects Analysis
The planned project poses no direct or indirect effect on the characteristics that qualify the Walter H.
Morgan House (Building B1) as a historical resource because the undertaking will not result in the
"substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource" (14 CCR 15064.5[b][1]; AEP
2021:176-177, 288) and thereby appears to not have a "significant effect on the environment" (14 CCR
15064.5[b]) and may be considered a Categorical Exemption under CEQA (14 CCR 15300; AEP
2021:176-177, 288). This effects analysis is broken down into two sections: the potential effects to the
south and east lawns of Building B 1 and an explanation for why this planned project does not meet any of
the exceptions preventing it from being considered a Categorical Exemption under 14 CCR 15300.2.
The south and east lawns, the location of most of the relevant construction plans, have not been
contributing factors to significance that have led to the present historic status of 3S/3CS/5S2 (DPR 2022;
O'Connor and Roth 1997; Trotoux 2012). Additionally, according to archival photographs of Building B1
(ca. 1947-1959), the design, materials, workmanship, and overall feeling of the south and east lawns have
significantly changed by the time the property was first recommended eligible in 1997 (Keylon 2018:74;
O'Connor and Roth 1997). The modifications over time included changes in arboreal curation, the addition
of the brick wall lining Avenida Obregon, and the removal of a paved walking path (Keylon 2018:74).
Additionally, by the time of the 2022 evaluation, approximately half of the east lawn had been converted
into astroturf for use as a croquet court (DPR 2022). As of the date of SRI's visit to the property in April
2026, most of the south lawn had already been converted into an area of amenities included in the Main
Pool area. None of these previous alterations to the east or south lawns has impacted the significance of
Building B 1 because the south and east lawns are not contributing factors to Building B 1's significance
(DPR 2022; O'Connor and Roth 1997; Trotoux 2012). Therefore, the proposed construction plans will not
have a direct effect on the Walter H. Morgan House (Building B 1).
As mentioned above, a substantial adverse change would include an indirect effect such as the alteration
of the "resource or its immediate surroundings that the significance of an historical resource would be
materially impaired" (14 CCR 15064.5[b][1]). As observed during a condition assessment and architectural
survey by SRI on April 24, 2026, the line of sight from Avenida Obregon to Building B 1 is interrupted by
a noncontributing brick wall lining the property along Avenida Obregon. This was present during the 2022
evaluation and did not impact significance (DPR 2022). However, there is a clear line of sight from Avenida
Obregon through the metal gate in the wall to the front door. Aside from the front door, only the second
story of the primary residence is presently visible from Avenida Obregon. The planned extension of the
pool, addition of ADA-compliant paths, and construction of cabanas will not impact this line of sight.
Additionally, the attached plans do not place either the new restroom/pool-equipment building nor the new
kids' water -play tower in a position that would interrupt the line of sight from Avenida Obregon to
Building B 1 as it presently exists (Houston/Tyner 2026). Additionally, indirect effects typically associated
with historical properties in similar recreational or social environments that attract visitors (such as
vandalism or modern trash dumping) are mitigated by the supervision, maintenance, and caretaking of the
La Quinta Resort & Club staff who will be present throughout hours of operation. Therefore, this analysis
indicates that the proposed construction plans will not have an indirect effect on the Walter H. Morgan
House (Building B1).
As described above, the south and east lawns of Building B 1 are not considered sensitive locations that
would result in a negative impact on the environment. Therefore, the proposed project does not meet the
exception of location, as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(a) of CEQA (AEP 2021:288).
The proposed project is not intended to be ongoing with successive stages of development. Therefore,
the proposed project does not meet the exception of cumulative impact, as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(b)
of CEQA (AEP 2021:288).
As described above, the proposed project has not been found to have a significant effect on the
environment due to unusual circumstances. Therefore, the proposed project does not meet the exception of
significant effect, as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(c) of CEQA (AEP 2021:288).
Although Building B 1 is considered a historical resource under 14 CCR 15064.5 of CEQA, it has been
determined that the proposed project will not have a direct or indirect effect on the historical resource's
significance or integrity. Therefore, the proposed project does not meet the exception of Scenic Highways,
as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(d) of CEQA (AEP 2021:176, 288).
The proposed project is not occurring on a hazardous -waste site. Therefore, the proposed project does
not meet the exception of Hazardous Waste Sites, as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(e) of CEQA (AEP
2021:288).
As discussed above, although Building B 1 is considered a historical resource under 14 CCR 15064.5
of CEQA, it has been determined that the proposed project will not have a direct or indirect effect on the
significance or integrity of the historical resource. Therefore, the proposed project does not meet the
exception of Historical Resources as defined in 14 CCR 15300.2(f) of CEQA (AEP 2021:176, 288).
SRI would like to thank the La Quinta Resort & Club staff for providing relevant information that aided in
completing this project. We have appreciated the care that the La Quinta Resort & Club places on the many
historical resources that contribute to their heritage. It has been a pleasure to work on this project. If you
have any questions, please feel free to call me at (909) 335-1896, or you can contact me by e-mail
at porourke@sricrm.com.
Respectfully,
Patrick D. O'Rourke
Senior Project Director
Statistical Research, Inc.
References Cited
Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP)
2021 2021 CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act Statutes & Guidelines. Association of
Environmental Professionals, Palm Desert, California.
N
California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)
2022 Site form for 49401 Avenida Obregon. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento.
Houston/Tyner
2026 La Quinta Resort & Club Family Pool: Schematics. Houston/Tyner, Torrance, California.
Keylon, Steven
2018 "Casa Adaire: " The Walter Kirschner Residence, 417 Hermosa Place, Palm Springs, CA
92262, Nomination Application for City of Palm Springs, Class I Historic Site. Palm Springs
Preservation Foundation, Palm Springs, California. Available online at
https://www.pspreservationfoundation.org/pdf/KIRSCHNERFINALDRAFT91318.pdf.
O'Connor, Pam, and Marcy Roth
1997 Site form for the Walter Morgan House. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento, California.
Trotoux, Jennifer
2012 Site form for the Walter H. Morgan House. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento, California.
5
ATTACHMENT B
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 7, 2026
TO: Jill West, Pyramid Global
FROM: RobertVu, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
JOB NO: 17115-01 Parking Justification
SUBJECT: LA QUINTA RESORT & CLUB CUP 2025-0004 PARKING
JUSTIFICATION MEMORANDUM
Urban Crossroads, Inc. has completed the following Parking Justification Memorandum for the La
Quinta Resort & Club (Project), which is located at 49-499 Eisenhower Drive in the City of La Quinta.
The preliminary site plan as provided bythe Applicant is shown on Exhibit 1. This Parking Justification
Memorandum was developed to address Item 3 of the Revised Second Incomplete Letter— La Quinta
Report Renovation of the Existing Family Swimming Pool CUP 2025-0004 (see Attachment A). Item
3 states the following:
Parking Study for the anticipated generated daily use traffic. You indicate in your response
that this will be an ancillary use to the resort, but provide no support for that statement.
Given the size of the resort, and the likely distance some families will travel within it to
use the pool, City staff, and eventually the Planning Commission, will need to understand
how this facility will operate without any parking whatever.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Project consists of remodeling the design of the pool area of an existing Resort. The
proposed Project is not modifying the existing operations of the Resort and there is no increase to
the number of rooms available to reserve. The pool and waterpark area will remain open and serve
registered guests only. Only guests with an active reservation will be allowed to have access to the
pool. The guestroom card automatically deactivates if there is no active reservation.
The majority of the current guests either walk to the pool or have the option to call the front desk
for a valet golf cart to take them, without impacting parking spaces. The pool currently operates with
hotel guest access only. The proposed Project will not reduce any parking spaces.
260 E. Baker Street I Suite 200 1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 1 (949) 660-1994 1 urbanxroads.com
EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
LEGEND
ce5sw ► ," 0. "AM.
,R ti aJOR -M.S]C N.TS ^J�"'�MY
17115-01 Parking Justification La Quinta Resort & Club
U„R
PARKING JUSTIFICATION
As identified previously, the proposed Project consists of remodeling the design of the pool area.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (121h Edition, 2025) and
Parking Generation Manual (6th Edition, 2023) provide the following description for ITE Land Use
Code 330 — Resort Hotel, which this Project resembles:
A resort hotel is similar to a hotel in that it provides sleeping accommodations, full -service
restaurants, cocktail lounges, retail shops, and guest services such as concierge and valet
service. The primary difference is that a resort hotel caters to the tourist and vacation
industry, often providing a wide variety of recreational facilities/programs (e.g., golf
courses, tennis courts, beach access, or other amenities) rather than convention and
meeting business.
The tennis courts and pool amenities that the Resort currently provides is considered an ancillary use
to the Resort. Only registered guests with an active reservation will be permitted to utilize these
hotel amenities. The guestroom card automatically deactivates if there is no active reservation.
The ITE Trip Generation Manual and Parking Generation Manual determines trip and parking
generation as a calculation of rooms provided on -site. Since there is no room increase to the Resort,
the trip and parking generation associated with a renovated pool is calculated to be zero. A fully
occupied resort would generate the same trips or parking demand with or without the proposed
renovations.
If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at rvu(a)urbanxroads.com.
17115-01 Parking Justification La Quinta Resort & Club
U7
ATTACHMENTA
INCOMPLETE LETTER
17115-01 Parking Justification La Quinta Resort & Club
March 19, 2026
Nicole Vann
MSA Consulting
34200 Bob Hope Drive
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
SUBJECT: REVISED SECOND INCOMPLETE LETTER - LA QUINTA RESORT
RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING FAMILY SWIMMING POOL CUP 2025-0004
Dear Ms. Vann:
On February 19, 2-026, the City of La Quinta Design and Development Department received resubmittal
materials for the above -referenced application for a family swimming pool renovation at the La Quinta
Resort property located at 49499 Eisenhower Drive.
The first step in the City's development application review process is to determine if your application
meets the minimum requirements for processing. These requirements are listed and described planning
application provided to you in Jack Lima's January 6, 2026 letter. Unless specifically waived, each item
listed on the application checklist is required to determine if your application is complete and acceptable
for processing. After reviewing all submitted information, your application remains incomplete. The
following items are required:
Modify the Statement of Operations to include the hours for seasonal operation, and the time
frames for each set of operating hours, for example "May to October..." Provide a description of
the pieces of equipment that will be installed to operate the pool and slides, including their location
on the site plan, whether they are above- or in -ground (and provide dimensioned elevations in the
plan details for all equipment that is above -ground). Provide a description of operational processes
such as backwash, refills, full water change, and their schedules. We were not asking about
construction equipment.
2. Plan Set: It appears that there was some confusion about the modifications to the plan set. For clarity, I
have itemized the changes required below.
a. Page 1: Correct the hours of operation per comment #1 above. Add the project area in
square feet and acres. Add required parking spaces per Municipal Code.
b. Page 2 and any other page where it occurs: remove the red hatch pattern. Keep the blue
outline. Add the blue outline to the Legend, and label it "Project Limits."
c. Page 2: Outline all structures/facilities to be removed in green. Add the green outline to
the Legend and label it "To be Demolished/Removed."
d. Page 3: Remove the yellow -highlighted labels that reference items outside the Project
Limits. Remove the surrounding areas and enlarge the site plan to include only the Project
Limits. Provide dimensions throughout the site plan: setbacks from proposed facilities to
the property/limit of work line; dimensions of buildings and slide tower, cabanas, etc.;
width and length of pool; label buildings and structures (cabanas, slide tower, restrooms,
spa rooms, bar, kitchen, etc.). Label and dimension all ground mounted mechanical
equipment to the nearest property line.
-� AI IF,II\!1-
Page 4 and 5: Duplicate dimensions and labeling from Page 3. On Page 4, label
equipment to the west of the heat pumps. If the area is not a building, show what is
proposed for screening on the west limit of work.
Page 6 and 7 and all other pages showing elevations: All height measurements must be to
top of roof of each roof area, or highest point if not depicting a building. Plate heights are
irrelevant. Include height on cabana, restroom sheets. The lifeguard stations appear to be
missing?
Page 17: Provide dimensioned slide section with height limits (see drawing 4 on Page 19).
Page 19: Provide height limits for drawing 4.
Renderings: Please check proportions. Based on correction 2.g. and 2.h., scale the
slides to have a correct relationship to surrounding structures. If the kids' pool
structure is 30± feel tall, it appears to be out of scale with the adjacent Morgan
House structure. If the OR Paae 1916 GeFFe Gt the kiah.6' nnnl StF Gt Hro is 61 food
ueAse The McFgon House iS Ret 61 feet tall. The pool also appears to be too small.
3. Parking Study for the anticipated generated daily use traffic. You indicate in your response that this
will be an ancillary use to the resort, but provide no support for that statement. Given the size of the
resort, and the likely distance some families will travel within it to use the pool, City staff, and
eventually the Planning Commission, will need to understand how this facility will operate without
any parking whatever.
4. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Exemption Justification Letter: Your letter has been
received, but is incomplete in two ways. First, an analysis for exemption must include an analysis of
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. Second, the project occurs adjacent to a historic structure, the
Morgan House. Please demonstrate that the project will have no indirect impact on that historic
structure. When the complete information is provided, we will review it to determine whether the City
can support an exemption for this project.
Once we determine the application complete, your application will move to the second step in the City's
application review process, the distribution to appropriate City departments and other reviewing
agencies for review and comment. This second step typically takes three to four weeks. Please note
that additional materials may be required as your application is reviewed.
Once the department and agency reviews are completed your application will move to the third and final
step in the application process and be scheduled for public hearings. Please note that there are other
items listed in the application forms that will be needed as public meeting and hearing schedules are
determined, such as a public hearing notification package, presentation exhibits, etc.
As you know, I work remotely from City Hall. If you have any questions about the requirements above,
please feel free to contact me at 760-341-4800 or consultingplanner(a)_laquintaca.gov
Sincerely,
Consulting Planner
Design and Development Department
ATTACHMENT C
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qu n i ta, CA
Prepared for:
Mr. Jay Pesci
Pyramid Advisors Limited Partnership (dba Pyramid Hotel Group)
30 Rowes Wharf, Ste 5300
Boston, MA 02110
C/C: Ms. Nicole Vann
MSA Consulting, Inc.
Prepared by:
MD Acoustics, LLC
Naomi Jensen, INCE-USA
Sarah Ostergaard, INCE-USA
1197 Los Angeles Ave, Ste C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Date: 4/10/2026
MD)ACOUSTICS
Noise Study Reports I Vibration Studies I Air Quality I Greenhouse Gas I Health Risk Assessments
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
1
1.2 Site Location and Study Area
1
1.3 Proposed Project Description
1
2.0 Fundamentals of Noise...................................................................................................................
4
2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics
4
2.2 Frequency and Hertz
4
2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
4
2.4 Addition of Decibels
4
2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
5
2.6 Noise Descriptors
5
2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction
6
2.8 Sound Propagation
7
3.0 Ground -Bourne Vibration Fundamentals......................................................................................
8
3.1 Vibration Descriptors
8
3.2 Vibration Perception
8
4.0 Regulatory Setting...........................................................................................................................
9
4.1 Federal Regulations
9
4.2 State Regulations
9
5.3 City of La Quinta Noise Regulations
10
4.4 CEQA Guidelines
14
5.0
Study Method and Procedure.......................................................................................................
15
5.1 Noise Measurement Procedure and Criteria
15
5.2 Noise Measurement Location
15
5.3 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model
15
5.4 SoundPLAN Noise Model (Operational Noise)
16
5.5 FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model
16
6.0
Existing Noise Environment..........................................................................................................
18
6.1 Long -Term Noise Measurement Results
18
7.0
Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation.....................................................................
20
7.1 Future Off -Site Exterior Noise
20
7.1.1 Future Off -Site Traffic Noise Impact
20
7.1.2 Noise Impacts to Off -Site Receptors Due to Stationary Sources
20
8.0
Construction Noise Impact...........................................................................................................
23
8.1 Off -site Construction Noise
23
8.3 Off -site Construction Vibration
24
9.0
References....................................................................................................................................
27
MD Acoustics, LLC ii
JN: 04112601_Report 26.4.10
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Table of Contents
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Photographs and Field Measurement Data....................................................................... 1
Appendix B: Traffic Noise Modeling Output.......................................................................................... 2
Appendix C: SoundPLAN Reference Data............................................................................................... 3
Appendix D: Construction Noise Modeling Output................................................................................ 4
LIST OF EXHIBITS
ExhibitA: Location Map..................................................................................................................... 2
ExhibitB: Site Plan.............................................................................................................................. 3
Exhibit C: Typical A -Weighted Noise Levels.......................................................................................4
Exhibit D: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines................................................................................... 11
Exhibit E: Measurement Locations.................................................................................................. 17
Exhibit F: Project Operational Noise Levels (dBA, Leq)................................................................... 22
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Exterior Noise Standards............................................................................................................. 12
Table 2: Roadway Parameters and Vehicle Distribution.......................................................................... 16
Table 3: Long -Term Noise Measurement Data, NM11............................................................................. 18
Table 4: Long -Term Noise Measurement Data, NM21............................................................................. 19
Table 5: Worst -Case Predicted Daytime Operational Leq Noise Levels (dBA)......................................... 21
Table 6: Typical Construction Noise Levels'............................................................................................. 23
Table 7: Off -site Construction Noise Levels at Existing Adjacent Residence to the North ....................... 24
Table 8: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria......................................................... 25
Table 9: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment'............................................................... 25
MD Acoustics, LLC iii
JN: 04112601_Report 26.4.10
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Introduction
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
This noise assessment was prepared to evaluate the potential noise impacts for the project study area
and to recommend noise mitigation measures, if necessary, to minimize the potential noise impacts. The
assessment was conducted and compared to the noise standards set forth by the Federal, State, and
Local agencies. Consistent with the City's Noise Guidelines, the project must demonstrate compliance
with the applicable noise criterion as outlined within the City's Noise Element and Municipal Code.
The following is provided in this report:
• A description of the study area and the proposed project
• Information regarding the fundamentals of noise
• A description of the local noise guidelines and standards
• An analysis of traffic noise impacts to and from the project site
• An analysis of construction noise impacts
1.2 Site Location and Study Area
The project site is located at 49401 Avenida Obregon in the City of La Quinta, CA, as shown in Exhibit A.
Land uses surrounding the site include the existing resort/hotel uses in all cardinal directions. The
nearest residential use is approximately 400 feet north of the project site. Avenida Obregon is to the
east.
1.3 Proposed Project Description
The project involves the renovation and modernization of the existing Family Pool at the operating resort
hotel. The renovation will refresh and reconfigure the existing pool area to include new water features,
kid -friendly pools with beach entry, expanded cabanas, a larger lounging deck, and integrated shaded
areas. There is an existing bar and kitchen that will remain in operation and will continue to provide
poolside food and beverage service. The proposed site plan is illustrated in Exhibit B.
This study assesses the operational noise and traffic noise to and from the project site and compares the
results to the applicable City noise standards. In addition, this study assesses the impact of construction
noise impacts associated with project construction activities.
-2-1
r1i
� 2 N
O b
1 rb Ul
� r
s �A
�
a m
s Ln �
� c o
1 � CL
' n
c
o-
v
0
0
a
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Fundamentals of Noise
2.0 Fundamentals of Noise
This section of the report provides basic information about noise and presents some of the terms used
within the report.
2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics
Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the
hearing organs. Sound may be thought of as the mechanical energy of a moving object transmitted by
pressure waves through a medium to a human ear. For traffic or stationary noise, the medium of concern
is air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted.
2.2 Frequency and Hertz Exhibit C: Typical A -Weighted Noise Levels
A continuous sound is described by its frequency
(pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency
relates to the number of pressure oscillations per
second. Low -frequency sounds are low in pitch (bass
sounding), and high -frequency sounds are high in
pitch (squeak). These oscillations per second (cycles)
are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The human
ear can hear from the bass pitch starting out at 20 Hz
all the way to the high pitch of 20,000 Hz.
2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
The amplitude of a sound determines its loudness.
The loudness of sound increases or decreases as the
amplitude increases or decreases. Sound pressure
amplitude is measured in units of micro -Newton per
square inch meter (N/m2), also called micro -Pascal
(µPa). One µPa is approximately one hundred
billionths (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric
pressure. Sound pressure level (SPL or Lp) is used to
describe in logarithmic units the ratio of actual
sound pressures to a reference pressure squared
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS FROM
INDOOR AND OUTDOOR NOISE SOURCES
COMMON OUTDOOR
NOISE LEVEL
COMMON INDOOR
NOISE LEVELS
(dBA)
NOISE LEVELS
110
Rock Band
Jet Flyover at 1000 ft.
too
Inside Subway Troln (Hew York)
Gae Lawn flower at 3 ft
90
Closed Truck of 50 ft.
Food BMnder at 3 ft-
Noise Urban Daytime
Garbage Disposal at 3 ft-
80
Shouting at 3 ft.
Gas lawn ►loner at too ft.
Vocuum Cleaner at 10 ft.
70
Commercial Area
Normal Speech at 3 ft.
Heavy Trolfic at 300 ft.
60
Large Business Office
Dlehnosher Next Room
Quiet Urban Daytime
50
Sma/ Theatre. Large Conference
Quiet Urban Nighttime
40
Room (B-kgraund)
Quiet Suburban Nighttime
30
Library
Bedroom of Night
0,Mt Rural Nighttime
Concert Hall (Background)
20
Recording Studio
,D
Threshold of Hearing
D
These units are called decibels, abbreviated dB. Exhibit C illustrates reference sound levels for different
noise sources.
2.4 Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are on a logarithmic scale, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by
simple plus or minus addition. When two sounds or equal SPL are combined, they will produce an SPL 3
dB greater than the original single SPL. In other words, sound energy must be doubled to produce a 3 dB
increase. If two sounds differ by approximately 10 dB, the higher sound level is the predominant sound.
R
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Fundamentals of Noise
2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz (A -
weighted scale), and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a
higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most
environmental documents, the A -scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A -weighted decibel
(dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB. A change in 5 dB
is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud. As previously
discussed, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling
of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) would result in a barely perceptible
change in sound level.
Changes in Intensity Level,
dBA
Changes in Apparent
Loudness
1
Not perceptible
3
Just perceptible
5
Clearly noticeable
10
Twice (or half) as loud
htt ps://www.fhwa.dot.gov/envi ro n Ment/noise/ regu I ati ons_and_guidance/polgu i d e/poIgu i d eO2. cfm
2.6 Noise Descriptors
Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time. Some noise levels occur in regular patterns, while
others occur randomly. Some noise levels are constant, while others are sporadic. Noise descriptors were
created to describe the different time -varying noise levels.
A -Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using
the A -weighted filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high -frequency
components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of
rating human judgment of loudness.
Ambient Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient
noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The average equivalent A -weighted sound level during a 24-
hour day, obtained after the addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00
PM and after the addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00
PM.
Decibel (dB): A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base
10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro -pascals.
dBA : A -weighted sound level (see definition above).
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Fundamentals of Noise
Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample
period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time -varying noise level. The energy average
noise level during the sample period.
Habitable Room: Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable
regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such
enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries,
unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces.
L n : The A -weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example,
L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly L50, L90 and L99, etc.
Noise: Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing,
or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines
noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...".
Outdoor Living Area: Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for
passive recreational activities or other noise -sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue
areas, jacuzzi areas, etc., associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas
associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of
worship which have a significant role in services or other noise -sensitive activities; and outdoor school
facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor
areas usually not included in this definition are front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas,
and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for
patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term
social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with
educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas).
Percent Noise Levels: See L(n).
Sound Level (Noise Level): The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter
having a standard frequency -filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum.
Sound Level Meter: An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency
weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels.
Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL): The dB(A) level, which, if it lasted for one second, would
produce the same A -weighted sound energy as the actual event.
2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction
Noise levels associated with traffic depend on a variety of factors: (1) volume of traffic, (2) speed of
traffic, (3) auto, medium truck (2 axle), and heavy truck percentage (3 axle and greater), and sound
propagation. The greater the volume of traffic, higher speeds and truck percentages equate to a louder
0
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Fundamentals of Noise
volume in noise. A doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) along a roadway will increase noise levels
by approximately 3 dB; reasons for this are discussed in the sections above.
2.8 Sound Propagation
As sound propagates from a source it spreads geometrically. Sound from a small, localized source (i.e., a
point source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The
sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The movement of vehicles down a
roadway makes the source of the sound appear to propagate from a line (i.e., line source) rather than a
point source. This line source results in the noise propagating from a roadway in a cylindrical spreading
versus a spherical spreading that results from a point source. The sound level attenuates for a line source
at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance.
As noise propagates from the source, it is affected by the ground and atmosphere. Noise models use
hard site (reflective surfaces) and soft site (absorptive surfaces) to help calculate predicted noise levels.
Hard site conditions assume no excessive ground absorption between the noise source and the receiver.
Soft site conditions such as grass, soft dirt or landscaping attenuate noise at a rate of 1.5 dB per doubling
of distance. When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall
noise attenuation of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance for a line source and 7.5 dB per doubling of distance
for a point source.
Research has demonstrated that atmospheric conditions can have a significant effect on noise levels
when noise receivers are located 200 feet or more from a noise source. Wind, temperature, air humidity
and turbulence can further impact have far sound can travel.
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Fundamentals of Noise
3.0 Ground -Bourne Vibration Fundamentals
3.1 Vibration Descriptors
Ground -borne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average
motion of zero. The effects of ground -borne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at
extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur. Although ground -borne vibration can be felt
outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors, where the associated effects of the shaking
of a building can be notable. Ground -borne noise is an effect of ground -borne vibration and only exists
indoors since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and
may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.
Several different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude.
PPV— Known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) which is the maximum instantaneous peak in vibration
velocity, typically given in inches per second.
RMS— Known as root mean squared (RMS) can be used to denote vibration amplitude
VdB — A commonly used abbreviation to describe the vibration level (VdB) for a vibration source.
3.2 Vibration Perception
Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. These
continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans, whose threshold of perception is around 65 VdB.
Outdoor sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment,
steel -wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible ground -
borne noise or vibration. To counter the effects of ground -borne vibration, the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has published guidance relative to vibration impacts. According to the FTA, fragile
buildings can be exposed to ground -borne vibration levels of 0.3 inches per second without experiencing
structural damage.
There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression, and shear waves. Surface
waves, or Rayleigh waves, travel along the ground's surface. These waves carry most of their energy
along an expanding circular wavefront, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of
water. P-waves, or compression waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding
spherical wavefront. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a "push-pull" fashion). P-
waves are analogous to airborne sound waves. S-waves, or shear waves, are also body waves that carry
energy along an expanding spherical wavefront. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is
transverse, side -to -side, and perpendicular to the direction of propagation. As vibration waves
propagate from a source, the vibration energy decreases in a logarithmic nature, and the vibration levels
typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source. As stated above, this
drop-off rate can vary greatly depending on the soil but has been shown to be effective enough for
screening purposes in order to identify potential vibration impacts that may need to be studied through
actual field tests.
s
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
4.0 Regulatory Setting
The proposed project is located in the City of La Quinta, and noise regulations are addressed through the
efforts of various federal, state, and local government agencies. The agencies responsible for regulating
noise are discussed below.
4.1 Federal Regulations
The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control Act
of 1972, which serves three purposes:
• Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce
• Assist state and local abatement efforts
• 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 for regulating noise from aircraft and airports.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible for regulating noise from the interstate
highway system. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the
prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers.
The federal government advocates that local jurisdiction use their land use regulatory authority to
arrange new development in such a way that "noise sensitive" uses are either prohibited from being
constructed adjacent to a highway or, or alternatively that the developments are planned and
constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized.
Since the federal government has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted
by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the
transportation system through nuisance abatement ordinances and land use planning.
4.2 State Regulations
Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was
instrumental in developing 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 the compatibility of sensitive uses with various
incremental levels of noise.
The State of California has established noise insulation standards as outlined in Title 24, the California
Building Code, which in some cases requires acoustical analyses to outline exterior noise levels and to
ensure interior noise levels do not exceed the interior threshold. The State mandates that the legislative
body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local
E
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
noise element usually recognizes the land use compatibility guidelines published by the State
Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally
acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable, as illustrated in
Exhibit D.
5.3 City of La Quinta Noise Regulations
The City of La Quinta outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Noise Element from the
General Plan and Municipal Code. For purposes of this analysis, the City's General Plan and Noise
Ordinance (Section 9.100.210) is used to evaluate the stationary noise impacts from the proposed
Project. The Noise Element outlines Goals and Polices and establishes Noise/Land Use Compatibility
Criteria. The project impacts were compared to the City's residential and commercial noise standards.
City of La Quinta General Plan
Applicable policies and standards governing environmental noise in the City are set forth in Chapter IV
of the General Plan, Environmental Hazards, Noise. Table IV-3 (Exhibit D of this report) of the City's Noise
Element outlines the exterior noise standards for community noise environments.
In addition to the noise standards, the City has outlined goals, policies, and implementation measures
to reduce potential noise impacts, which are presented below:
Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures
Applicable policies, goals, and implementation program measures from the Noise Element that would
mitigate potential impacts on noise include the following.
Goal N-1: A healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and resort character.
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 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.
Policy N.1.6: The City may require remedial noise control plans and/or improvements for areas
experiencing noise in excess of adopted City standards.
Program N1.6.a: Remedial improvements will be included in the Capital Improvement Program.
Policy N.1.7: Noise impact analysis shall be included in all City Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
and developer -required roadway widening projects to demonstrate compliance
with City noise standards.
10
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
Exhibit D: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines
Table IV-3
Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments
Land Uses
CNEL (dBA)
0
55
60
65
70
75
80
Residential Single Family Dwellings,
Duplex, Mobile Homes
Residential - Multiple Family
Transient Lodging: Hotels and Motels
School Classrooms, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes and
Convalescent Hospitals
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters
juu
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, water
Recreation, Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Business, Commercial and
Professional
Industrial, Manufactunng, Utilities,
Agriculture
Source: California Department of Health Services, "Guidelines for the Preparation and
Content of the Noise Element of the General Plan," tggo
Normally Acceptable: With no special none reduction requirements assuming standard
construction.
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.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Section 9.100.210 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's noise ordinance.
11
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
Section 9.100.210 — Noise Control
A. Purpose. The noise control standards for nonresidential land use districts set forth in this section
are established to prevent excessive sound levels which are detrimental to the public health,
welfare and safety or which are contrary to the public interest.
B. Noise Standards. Exterior noise standards are set forth below (Exhibit D in this report). Residential
property, schools, hospitals, and churches are considered noise sensitive land uses, regardless of
the land use district in which they are located. All other uses shall comply with the "other
nonresidential" standard. All noise measurements shall be taken using standard noise measuring
instruments. Measurements shall be taken within the receiving property at locations determined
by director to be most appropriate to the individual situation.
All ambient noise measurements shall commence at the base ambient noise levels in decibels within the
respective times and zones as follows:
Table 1: Exterior Noise Standards
Receiving Land Use
Noise Standard (dBA)
7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.
Noise sensitive
65
50
Other nonresidential
75
65
If the noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech or music, or any combination
thereof, each of the noise levels specified in the table in this section shall be reduced by five (5) dB(A).
C. Noise Limits. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise, or
to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled
by such person, when such noise causes the noise level, when measured on any adjacent
property, to exceed:
1. The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour:
2. The noise standard plus five (5) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15)
minutes in any hour;
3. The noise standard plus ten (10) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than five (5)
minutes in any hour;
4. The noise standard plus fifteen (15) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one (1)
minute in any hour; or
5. The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB(A) for any period of time.
For purposes of this section, the term "cumulative period" means the number of minutes that
noise occurs within any hour, whether such minutes are consecutive or not.
12
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
D. Ambient Noise Level. If the ambient or background noise level exceeds any of the preceding noise
categories, no increase above such ambient noise level shall be permitted.
E. Exceptions. The following are exempt from noise restrictions of this section:
1. Emergency vehicles or other emergency operations.
2. City maintenance, construction or similar activities.
3. Construction activities regulated by Section 6.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
4. Golf course maintenance activities between 5:30 a.m. and ending no later than 8:00 p.m.
on any given day
F. Enforcement. The city manager or designee shall have the responsibility and authority to enforce
the provisions of this section.
Chapter 6.08.050 — Disturbances by construction noises
A. It is a nuisance and it is unlawful, for any person to be engaged or employed, or for any person
to cause any other person to be engaged or employed, in any work of construction, erection,
alteration, repair, addition to, or improvement to realty, except between the hours set forth as
follows:
October 1st through April 30th
Monday — Friday:
7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Saturday:
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Sunday:
none
Holidays*:
none
May 1st through September 30th
Monday — Friday:
6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Saturday:
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Sunday:
none
Holidays*:
none
*For purposes of this section, the following shall be considered Holidays:
New Year's Day (January 1st)
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day (third Monday in January)
President's Day (third Monday in February formerly Washington's birthday)
Memorial Day (last Monday in May)
Independence Day (July 4th)
Labor Day (first Monday in September)
Veteran's Day (November 11th)
Thanksgiving (fourth Thursday in November)
Christmas Day (December 25th)
B. No person doing or causing work prohibited by subsection A of this section, after being informed
orally or in writing that the work is in violation of subsection A, shall fail, refuse or neglect to
cease said work.
13
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Regulatory Setting
Exceptions:
1. Emergency repair of existing installations or equipment or appliances:
2. Construction work complying with the terms of a written early work permit which
may be issued by the city manager or designee, upon a showing of sufficient need
due to hot or inclement weather, or the use of an unusually long process material,
or other circumstances of unusual and compelling nature.
4.4 CEQA Guidelines
According to CEQA guidelines, the project would have a potential impact if it resulted in:
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 groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
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?
14
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Study Method and Procedure
5.0 Study Method and Procedure
The following section describes the noise modeling procedures and assumptions used for this
assessment.
5.1 Noise Measurement Procedure and Criteria
Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any
location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to
select measurement locations and receptors:
• Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as the first row of houses
• Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent of the area of concern
• Human land usage
• Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination
MD conducted the sound level measurements in accordance to the County's and Caltrans (TeNS) technical
noise specifications. All measurement equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA). The following gives a
brief description of the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement procedures for sound level measurements:
• Microphones for sound level meters were placed 5-feet above the ground for all measurements
• Sound level meters were calibrated (Larson Davis CAL 200) before and after each measurement
• Following the calibration of equipment, a windscreen was placed over the microphone
• Frequency weighting was set on "A" and slow response
• Results of the long-term noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets
• During any short-term noise measurements, any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local
traffic, lawn mowers, or aircraft fly-overs were noted
• Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented
5.2 Noise Measurement Location
The noise monitoring locations were selected to obtain a baseline of the existing noise environment. Two
(2) long-term 24-hour noise measurements were conducted at the project site. Appendix A includes photos,
the field sheet, and measured noise data. Exhibit E illustrates the location of the measurements.
5.3 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model
Traffic noise impact from vehicular traffic was projected using ADT data from the La Quinta Resort Traffic
Study prepared by Urban Crossroads in 2009. Using this data, ADT volumes from the year 2009 were
calculated along the segments of Avenida Fernando, Eisenhower Drive, and Calle Mazatlan closest to the
project. Table 2 (below) shows the 2009 ADTs of the subject roadways used in the traffic noise analysis.
<Table 2, next page>
15
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Study Method and Procedure
Table 2: Roadway Parameters and Vehicle Distribution
Roadway
Segment
2009 ADT'
Ventura Blvd
West of Whitsett Ave
1,900
Whitsett Ave
North of Ventura Blvd
8,100
' 2009 ADTs taken from the La Quinta Resort Traffic Study prepared by Urban Crossroads.
5.4 SoundPLAN Noise Model (Operational Noise)
SoundPLAN (SP) acoustical modeling software was utilized to model future worst -case stationary noise
impacts to the adjacent land uses. SP is capable of evaluating multiple stationary noise source impacts
at various receiver locations. SP's software utilizes algorithms (based on the inverse square law and
reference equipment noise level data) to calculate noise level projections. The software allows the user
to input specific noise sources, spectral content, sound barriers, building placement, topography, and
sensitive receptor locations.
Sources of operational noise associated with the project include a water slide, lounging/dining areas,
and pool noise. Pool equipment is assumed to be shielded from exterior uses. The future worst -case
noise level projections were modeled using referenced sound level data from the Sound PLAN library for
the various stationary on -site sources. As a worst -case scenario, the model assumes the water slide,
lounging/dining areas, and pool are always operating at full capacity.
Referenced SounclPLAN library sound level data was utilized to model the various stationary on -site noise
sources associated with project operation. The model is able to evaluate the noise -attenuating effects
of any existing property line walls. Input and output calculations are provided in Appendix C.
5.5 FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model
The construction noise analysis utilizes the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway
Construction Noise Model (RNCM), together with several key construction parameters. Key inputs
include distance to the sensitive receiver, equipment usage, % usage factor, and baseline parameters for
the project site.
The project was analyzed based on the different construction phases. The construction noise calculation
output worksheet is in Appendix D.
16
0
-1.
1
S�
.Ii
II 'I
r
O m
A X
e-F
�•
m
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Existing Noise Environment
6.0 Existing Noise Environment
Two (2) 24-hour noise measurements were conducted at the project site to document the existing noise
environment. The measurement includes the 1-hour Leq, Lmin, Lmax, and other statistical data (e.g., L2,
1-8). Noise measurement locations are provided in Exhibit E.
6.1 Long -Term Noise Measurement Results
The results of the long-term noise data from location 1 (NM1) are presented in Table 3. The quietest
recorded daytime hourly level is highlighted in green while the loudest recorded hourly level is
highlighted in orange.
Table 3: Long -Term Noise Measurement Data, NMI'
Date
Start
Stop
1-Hour dB(A)
LEQ
LMAX
LMIN
L2
L8
L25
L50
L90
2/4/2026
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
51.2
79.1
41.1
60.9
52.8
49.7
45.7
43.1
2/4/2026
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
49.0
73.6
40.6
55.3
53.4
49.7
46.5
42.9
2/4/2026
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
55.9
74.1
41.1
62.2
61.0
56.2
50.3
44.0
2/4/2026
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
57.5
78.7
43.1
63.3
60.7
58.1
56.3
51.5
2/4/2026
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
62.8
76.6
43.6
66.7
66.3
64.3
62.1
53.3
2/4/2026
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
69.9
77.6
53.5
73.1
72.6
71.2
69.7
62.7
2/4/2026
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
72.8
80.5
65.1
74.3
74.0
73.5
72.9
70.9
2/4/2026
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
75.2
81.5
67.6
77.0
76.4
75.8
75.3
73.5
2/4/2026
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
76.3
83.9
68.7
77.8
77.6
77.1
76.3
74.2
2/4/2026
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
62.8
84.5
45.1
69.7
66.0
62.4
58.7
55.2
2/4/2026
11:00 PM
12:00 AM
56.4
75.9
42.0
62.6
61.4
57.4
53.3
49.0
2/5/2026
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
57.7
85.9
41.8
62.2
60.1
57.9
55.7
50.1
2/5/2026
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
47.5
72.2
40.8
56.8
50.4
43.8
42.4
41.7
2/5/2026
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
47.4
72.1
41.1
53.8
45.5
43.2
42.2
41.8
2/5/2026
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
45.4
62.3
41.6
49.6
49.3
43.6
43.0
42.4
2/5/2026
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
43.7
57.7
42.1
45.9
44.3
43.8
43.5
43.0
2/5/2026
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
45.0
59.8
42.3
51.1
46.1
44.7
44.1
43.2
2/5/2026
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
50.4
72.7
43.0
59.7
53.3
47.5
45.9
44.6
2/5/2026
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
53.5
75.2
45.1
59.2
55.2
51.1
50.3
48.7
2/5/2026
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
58.5
77.2
43.9
65.1
64.7
60.4
51.4
48.2
2/5/2026
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
56.6
79.1
44.0
65.0
61.4
56.1
53.8
48.9
2/5/2026
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
50.3
72.2
42.9
55.6
54.3
50.3
47.7
44.8
2/5/2026
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
50.6
1 69.2
1 43.0
56.4
53.1
50.8
1 49.1
46.6
2/5/2026
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
50.2
68.5
42.5
58.7
54.6
48.4
46.4
44.8
CNEL
71.6
Notes:
' Long-term noise monitoring location (NM1) is illustrated in Exhibit E.
18
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Existing Noise Environment
The results of the long-term noise data from location 2 (NM2) are presented in Table 4. The quietest
recorded daytime hourly level is highlighted in green while the loudest recorded hourly level is
highlighted in orange.
Table 4: Long -Term Noise Measurement Data, NM21
Date
Start
Stop
1-Hour dB(A)
LEQ
LMAX
LMIN
L2
L8
L25
L50
L90
2/4/2026
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
47.9
60.9
43.6
51.3
50.1
48.4
47.2
45.2
2/4/2026
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
50.8
82.4
43.1
58.9
50.8
46
44.9
44.1
2/4/2026
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
51.6
74.9
43.8
60.2
54.9
51.3
48.2
44.8
2/4/2026
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
59.1
82.5
44.5
66.5
62.6
59.3
57.7
47.8
2/4/2026
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
73.2
86.2
45.0
78.6
77.1
74.9
73.0
54.5
2/4/2026
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
81.3
89.9
56.2
84.6
83.9
82.7
81.1
73.8
2/4/2026
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
83.3
89.7
72.5
84.8
84.6
84.2
83.2
81.8
2/4/2026
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
84.5
90.9
76.2
86.2
85.6
85.0
84.4
83.1
2/4/2026
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
85.8
91.7
78.9
87.4
86.8
86.4
86.0
84.2
2/4/2026
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
69.6
91.2
45.0
80.5
69.8
61.5
59.4
54.6
2/4/2026
11:00 PM
12:00 AM
56.3
78.8
44.9
63.7
59.4
55.3
52.4
46.1
2/5/2026
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
57.4
81.6
44.9
65.3
60.6
55.3
51.2
46.7
2/5/2026
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
45.8
59.5
44.6
47.4
46.5
45.9
45.7
45.3
2/5/2026
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
45.9
50.0
44.6
46.7
46.4
46.1
45.8
45.4
2/5/2026
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
46.3
54.5
45.1
47.4
47.0
46.6
46.2
45.8
2/5/2026
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
46.8
50.6
45.1
47.7
47.4
47.0
46.7
46.2
2/5/2026
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
47.4
61.8
45.5
48.9
47.9
47.6
47.2
46.4
2/5/2026
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
53.2
68.0
46.2
63.1
57.9
48.8
48.3
47.4
2/5/2026
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
55.0
68.6
47.3
60.5
59.1
56.5
51.2
48.9
2/5/2026
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
54.9
67.7
46.2
59.4
57.9
56.3
53.9
48.9
2/5/2026
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
52.9
68.8
46.6
57.1
55.1
54.0
52.1
50.1
2/5/2026
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
49.6
62.6
45.8
54.1
52.0
50.2
48.7
47.0
2/5/2026
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
56.0
72.1
45.3
59.3
58.5
57.0
56.0
50.3
2/5/2026
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
48.0
61.0
45.2
53.7
49.3
48.2
46.8
46.1
CNEL
81.0
Notes:
' Long-term noise monitoring location (NM2) is illustrated in Exhibit E.
Noise data indicates the ambient noise level ranged from 43 to 86 hourly dBA Leq and 72 to 81 dBA CNEL
on the project site. From the hours of 5PM to 10 PM, an event on the property caused the noise levels
to increase up to 86 dBA Leq hourly. Additional field notes are provided in Appendix A.
19
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation
7.0 Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation
This assessment analyzes future noise impacts to and from the project and compares the results to the
City's Noise Standards. The analysis details the estimated exterior noise levels associated with traffic
from adjacent roadway sources and project operations. There are no airports within 2 miles of the
project site.
7.1 Future Off -Site Exterior Noise
The exterior noise level off -site of the project will be impacted by transportation -related sources and
stationary sources from the site. The following outlines the impacts associated with exterior noise levels.
7.1.1 Future Off -Site Traffic Noise Impact
The potential noise impacts caused by the increase in vehicular traffic as a result of the project were
analyzed using ADT data from the La Quinta Resort Traffic Study prepared by Urban Crossroads in 2009.
Using this data, ADT volumes from the year 2009 were calculated along the segments of Avenida
Fernando, Eisenhower Drive, and Calle Mazatlan closest to the project. It takes a doubling of traffic
volumes to audibly increase traffic noise levels along a roadway. The addition of the pool renovation
project is not expected to double the 2009 ADT volumes along Avenida Fernando, Eisenhower Drive, or
Calle Mazatlan. Thus, the noise impact to off -site receptors due to project traffic is less than significant.
This is based on a conservative assumption, as the ADT volumes along the subject roadways have likely
increased since 2009. See Appendix B for ADT volume calculations.
7.1.2 Noise Impacts to Off -Site Receptors Due to Stationary Sources
Sensitive receptors that may be affected by project operational noise include existing residences to the
north and west. The worst -case stationary noise was modeled using SoundPLAN acoustical modeling
software. Worst -case assumes that the water slide and all dining/lounging and pool are in use
simultaneously and at full capacity. Project operations are expected to occur during daytime hours. Thus,
project operational noise projections are compared to the quietest expected daytime noise levels as a
conservative worst -case scenario.
A total of six (6) receptors were modeled to evaluate the proposed project's operational impact. A
receptor is denoted by a yellow dot. All yellow dots represent either a property line or a sensitive
receptor, such as a building facade. Receptors 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 represent off -site residential uses to the
north, while receptor 5 represents off -site residential uses to the west.
Project -Only Levels
Exhibit F shows the "Project -Only" noise levels and contours at the nearest sensitive receptors. The
project -only hourly noise levels range from 42 to 57 dBA Leq at the various adjacent receptors.
20
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation
Project Plus Ambient Operational Noise Levels
Table 5 demonstrates the project plus the ambient noise levels during the quietest expected daytime
conditions. The existing quietest ambient noise level at each receptor location was determined using the
quietest recorded hourly noise level measured on site (see Section 6.1). Project plus ambient noise level
projections are anticipated to be 49 to 57 dBA Leq.
Table 5: Worst -Case Predicted Daytime Operational Leq Noise Levels (dBA)
Receptor'
Existing Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)'
Project
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)3
Daytime Noise
Level Limit
(dBA, Leq)
Total Combined
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)
Potential
Significant
Impact
1
48
47
65
51
No
2
48
42
65
49
No
3
48
53
65
54
No
4
48
53
65
54
No
5
48
45
1 65
50
No
6
1 48
1 57
65
1 57
1 No
Notes:
' Receptors 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 represent off -site residential uses to the north and receptor 5 represents off -site residential uses to the west.
Z See Appendix A for the ambient noise measurement.
3. See Exhibit F for the operational noise level projections at said receptors.
As shown in Table 5, the project plus ambient noise level will reach a maximum of 57 dBA Leq during the
quietest daytime hour at the nearest sensitive off -site receptors. This is below the 65 dBA Leq exterior
stationary noise level limit for sensitive uses outlined in section 9.100.210 of the La Quinta Municipal
Code. Thus, project operational noise will meet the City's noise limits, and the impact is less than
significant.
21
ro
a
0
a
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Construction Noise Impact
8.0 Construction Noise Impact
The degree of construction noise may vary for different areas of the project site and also vary depending
on the construction activities. Noise levels associated with the construction will vary with the different
phases of construction. The construction noise and vibration level projections are provided in the
sections below.
8.1 Off -site Construction Noise
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled data regarding the noise characteristics of
typical construction activities. The data is presented in Table 6.
Table 6: Typical Construction Noise Levels'
Equipment Powered by Internal Combustion Engines
Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet
Earth Moving
Compactors (Rollers)
73 - 76
Front Loaders
73 - 84
Backhoes
73 - 92
Tractors
75 - 95
Scrapers, Graders
78 - 92
Pavers
85 - 87
Trucks
81 - 94
Materials Handling
Concrete Mixers
72 - 87
Concrete Pumps
81 - 83
Cranes (Movable)
72 - 86
Cranes (Derrick)
85 - 87
Stationary
Pumps
68 - 71
Generators
71 - 83
Compressors
75 - 86
Impact Equipment
Type
Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet
Saws
71 - 82
Vibrators
68 - 82
Notes:
' Referenced Noise Levels from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Construction is anticipated to occur during the permissible hours as described in the La Quinta Municipal
Code Section 6.08.050(A). Thus, construction noise is exempt from regulation per section 9.100.201(E)
of the City's Municipal Code.
23
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Construction Noise Impact
Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction
occurs outside the allowable times as described in the City's Municipal Code. Construction noise will
have a temporary or periodic increase in the ambient noise level above the existing within the project
vicinity. The construction noise impact is considered less than significant; however, construction noise
level projections are provided.
Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of
full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Noise levels are in Table
7. A likely worst -case construction noise scenario assumes equipment operating as close as 330 feet and
an average of 435 feet from the nearest off -site sensitive receptor, the residences to the north of the
project site.
Table 7: Off -site Construction Noise Levels at Existing Adjacent Residence to the North
Phase
dBA Leq
Demo
69.7
Site Prep
64.8
Grading
65.8
Build
64.9
Paving
65.6
Arch Coating
55.2
The noise due to project construction activities will range between 55 and 70 dBA Leq at the nearest off -
site residences to the north. The construction activities will take place in the allowed times per section
6.08.050(A) of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Thus, noise due to construction is less than significant.
8.3 Off -site Construction Vibration
Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The construction of
the proposed project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to
generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may
be from a vibratory roller. A vibratory roller has a vibration impact of 0.21 inches per second peak particle
velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below any risk to architectural damage.
The fundamental equation used to calculate vibration propagation through average soil conditions and
distance is as follows:
PPVequipment = PPVref (100/Drec)n
Where: PPVref = reference PPV at 100ft.
Drec = distance from equipment to receiver in ft.
n =1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through ground)
24
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Construction Noise Impact
The thresholds from the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual
in Table 8 (below) provides general thresholds and guidelines as to the vibration damage potential from
vibratory impacts.
Table 8: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria
Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments
0.12
0.08
Fragile buildings
0.2
0.1
Historic and some old buildings
0.5
0.25
Older residential structures
0.5
0.3
New residential structures
1.0
0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings
2.0
0.5
Source: Table 19, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Caltrans, Sept. 2013.
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include
impact pile drivers, pogo -stick compactors, crack -and -seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
Table 9 gives approximate vibration levels for particular construction activities. This data provides a
reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil conditions.
Table 9: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment'
Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity
(inches/second) at 25 feet
Approximate Vibration Level
LV (dVB) at 25 feet
Pile driver (impact)
1.518 (upper range)
112
0.644 (typical)
104
Pile driver (sonic)
0.734 upper range
105
0.170 typical
93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall)
0.202
94
Hydromill
0.008 in soil
66
(slurry wall)
0.017 in rock
75
Vibratory Roller
0.21
94
Hoe Ram
0.089
87
Large bulldozer
0.089
87
Caisson drill
0.089
87
Loaded trucks
0.076
86
Jackhammer
0.035
79
Small bulldozer
0.003
58
' Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006.
The nearest off -site receptor to construction activities is a residential building located approximately 330
feet to the north of the site. At a distance of 330 feet, a vibratory roller would yield a worst -case 0.012
25
2895 LQ Resort and Club — Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA Construction Noise Impact
PPV (in/sec) which will likely not be perceptible and below any risk of damage (0.3 in/sec PPV is the
threshold of old residential structures). The impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
26
2895 LQ Resort and Club - Pool Renovation
Noise Impact Study
City of La Qunita, CA References
9.0 References
City of La Quinta
1999 General Plan Noise Element
2024 Municipal Code
2024 Construction Noise and Vibration, Updates to Thresholds and Methodology
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2013 Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual.
2018 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sept.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
2010 Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
State of California General Plan Guidelines, 1998
SoundPLAN International, LLC
2025 SouncIPLAN Essential 9.0 Manual.
27
Appendix A:
Photographs and Field Measurement Data
A4
LIC
N N N
m O
EL a
z D
n
m o_
z m 0
CD N
N Q N
O
OCL
03
N
3
3'
N N
A z
S ••
O
c p
O- N
c N
91 A
0 O
O Ui
O
F.
a
i
z
m
N
z
Mm
0
m
0
7
O
A
O
r
kD
d
v �
N
o
cn
co;
A
F,
G
ON
O
c N
m
N
w
3
70
m
OO
z
0-
90
o
M
n
3
0
E
7
0
(p
-n
7
N
3
N
7
C
0
O
0
m
p
V1
m
m
0
6
0
m
1
C
01
0
3
M m
a D
a
a
m
0
O
3
Z A
A
P� O
F+
Z D
CD
N 3
Q
v
O
s
CD
00
0
3
1n
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
M
17
Ui Ui Ui cn cn Ui (.i lr1 to to V1 V'i In -Pb A A A A A A A A A A
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
D
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
�0
m
a)
^
N N NJ N NJ N N N N N hiN N N N N N Ili Ili N Ili N Ili Ili!\
N
/l
mOl Ol O1 O1 O1 Ol 0Q1 0 0 Q1 0Q1 0T Q1 Ol Ol O1 O1 O1 Ol Ol
M
O
n
C
l0 00 J Ql V1 A W N ►+ N 1C OO J 01 U'I A W N I�
01
0
Cn
N I� O 1--� O
O O O O p p p p pp D O O O O O O O O O
BSSSOg
y
3
O O O
D D D D D D D D D D D y y 'o
N
O
A
l0 00 J 01 V1 A W N I--� p 00 J Ol Up A W N
N O N F+ O
O Q 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 0 0
M
<
CD
ff1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
(D
v D D D D D D D D D D D y y o
v
o
0
p
�
Qo
CD
n
0
3
S
l!1 U9 U9 U9 U9 U9 U9 A A A A V+ V1 0s V J J O) Q1 U9 U9 U9
O O O O1 Oo W O A W Vt V V V 01 N Oh p N p N J- A F-+
M
aTi
N 01 W 01 U9 Ul AV V A A 111 V A 00 W N 00 l0 00 Un l0 ID N
3
0
O
O
r
01 01 V J J V V V1 V1 01 V V 00 V 00 00 00 00 V J J V V V
00 1-0 N 1.0 J Ul N lD O V O1 00 A W l0
=
V N N N E V7 A W N
U'7 N N N N V 00 V W F+ N lD W V1 LD Vi Ui 01 01 J 01
01 (D
X
W
ai
(D
(D
(D
A A A A A A A A 8 A A pp�1 0) 0) Ui A A A A A
N A N A W U'i A N A V1 00 J U'i W W W I--� O
r 0
W C)
rr
V!
N 1-� F+ 1-+
W A W!-P
N 1- V M
V
9
N
0
m
d
Ln LO lD I--� F+ om 00 00 I--� In MI--' I--� MI--�
3
Q
N
f�D
3
= O
-0,(D
°
as a
c
a
0
m00
iD
3
v
In In In O) In In In A A Vt In Ol 01 M V J J Ol Ol 0) In 0)
00 01 Ul Ol U9 l0 l0 m N N lD V J A W Ol W N Un O
r
0
V A 01 F Ili V 1.- w 01 Oo 00 NJ01 V 00 J W I--` J W Ili LO
N
a
3
..
3
J
00
W
<
(D
-n
u
Q
O Ul Ul Ul 01 01 Ul Ln A A A Ln Q1 O1 V V J 01 01 Ul Ul
V 01
r
(3D
7
3
Z O O F+ V Q1 N Q1 O W N
01 W A J Ili W F+ W W Ln F+ 0) A A Ol W -I A 00
7
D
7
P"
A A
N
O
Q
O
O
rD
0
A Ui Ui cn a)Ui A A A A A A 0 In O V V J J 0) cn Ui A A
O O
Q
0
OOi
00 O O Ol O V A W W W W V V N V V7 W A 00 0) LD LD
nr,1
M
J A 00 W h- A ill V 00 01 N 00 lD A A F+ 00 V7 N W N V V
N
�.
0
—
O (D
N
O N
O
n
�
(D IL
N
A A A Ln Ln cn A A A A A V+ V1 N V J J 0) M cn cn A A
Z 01 lD V W I--' O U'i A W �' N N Ln W 00 M In N lO N Ol CD pU9
r
:
N
\
C
A J 00 A Lu l0 " In W N A �-1 W J W W w V I--' W W Ul J
O
O)
C
3
fD
O
(D
A A A A A A A A A A A In In V J V 01 Ui cn A A
r
A 01 � 00 00 00 A W W N N- F+ O Vt A W O N W!- N W
0) F+
�p
rn 00 0) 00 l0 N V N A 00 J N N W W V W Ln w
ai
f
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\
\\�\\\\�\�\\\\\�\�\\\\�
D
M
�
to to to cn cn to to to to to to to to A A A A A A A A A A A
a
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
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
z
D
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 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
(p
N
^
!\ /l
O1 Ol Ol O1 O1 O1 Ol 01 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 T Q1 Ol Ol O1 O1 O1 Ol Ol
�
fD
O
O
n
C
<D 00 V Ql lQA ►Q+ N tD OO V Ol U'I A W N I�
of
0
C
N I� O QA QW QN 1--� O
00 O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O `-' `-' S
y
3
I
�
00
D D D D D D D D D D D D -o 'o
(�
N
O
A
Ol U•I W N I-` N F+ Q t0 00 V 9l V7 A W N
000000000000000000000000
:
v D D D D D D D D D D D y y o v v v v v v v
v
o
0
p
�
Qo
CD
n
0
3
S
A V7 V7 U'I A A A A A V+ V1 as 00 00 00 00 V V7 U'I U'I A
A
M lD N A L, W �! 01 Qi VI V1 �! 01 lD V• A W F-� W <D I--� O V
00 Ol Ol to to N A 00 W to 00 A W 01 w w W W N I--' m 00 lD
(rp
M
aT)
3
0
O
O
V (3) 0) 0) 01 m to to to 00 V tD t0 w w w 00 w V w m
N N 00 V 00 A to O lD lD Ol N A N O
=
1--` O tD I-- 00 F-` I--`
O
ID
I--� Ol 00 V Ol 00 01 to to M 00 N V t4 V (.D N Ln lD A (.D
X N
co
al
(D
7
(D
A A A A A A A A A A jA� ja p jAs v -I V tJ I A A A A
In In In Ol Ol V 0) N to tr A A A A A 00 0) N 0) A A W W w
O
00 Ll to
v!
N W w m N W N t!1 F+ i m 01 w t0 � tD N Un N .n 00 in
3 (OD
�• O
0'�j
—
M
LE
3 = ID
O
O
m
°
as a
c
a
c
m 00
M
3
o
In In to to V7 0) 0) A A A A A Ol 0) 00 00 00 00 00 V 0) 0) to to
(D
—
W l0 A V lfl O W 00 V V 0) V In W O V 01 A A 00 Ol O 00
:
O
V W I-` I--` A Ln I--` W II A V A W V to A N 00 Ol O1 V1 N lD W
V
C
3
..
3
°
C
D V
N 00
co
C
6 -n
-
3 (n
O
A In to to l!'I l!'I A A A A QQ�1 to C) 00 00 00 00 V a) In to to
O
7
z to 00 N U'I V to V V V v 01 Fn O tD to 01 U'I A W V N A 0 0
W In 110 (.0 w A A V1 A oo 00 0) Ol 110 0) l0 00
0-
01
N
7
N
to
O
O
fU
rD
z
v
A to to U'I A A A A A In V( M 00 00 00 V cn to A
00 (-nO ul 9) 01 00 V A 01 C1 In tJl to f+ 01 00 A N A lD I--� A CO
r
N
7
�.
M
w
co N V N A W (n 00 (n V 0) f+ to W W to A N N V lD W W AUl
N
O
CA
O
-
O
C
N
r
f1
�
Q
d4
N
vC
G
A A Ln to to A A A A A A 0 0 'o pp00 00 00 to A A A
Z 01 00 N W I� 00 �I Qt 01 ut LnH+ N lD A W N W V 00 A V
Ul
0
\
C
00 :-I I-- l0 N W N V N 00 V N A A A N N t0 N
O
�
�
�
y
3
G
(p
O
fD
A to to A A A A A A A A A A V+ 00 00 00 V to A A A A
Ol O A O go go V Gi Gh In N to 01 P) A A w N w A V A A to
r
to
h- lD lD A A N 00 A W '! H- 01 N 00 00 In 00 00 I--` N
0
m
17
Leq(h), dBA
a
H
°1
n
0
m
O!
C
O 0 0 O O 0
0
0
Cr.
cn
1:00 PM
^1_
iv
z
A
\ /
(/)
2:00 PM
—�
o
A
3:00 PM
3
4:00 PM
�
a
ni
0
O
SF
90
5:00 PM
o
El
c
co
s
6:00 PM
a)
J
<
7:00 PM
"'
v
m
0
o_
8:00 PM
J
N
9:00 PM
J
w
10:00 PM
E
11:00 PM
m
A
A
i
Z
12:00 AM
2
CO
0
Ln
rt
;I
Q
„
m
m
1
1:00 AM
s
°0
-q
c
�
o
20
2:00 AM
o
c
A
3:00 AM
P
3
C
4:00 AM
A
w
v
v
co
a
oo
c
5:00 AM
N
(D
c
Q
ao
6:00 AM
D
<
N
7:00 AM
Q
O
o
ru
8:00 AM
--
v
Z
C
Q
aOi
vO-i•
"5
9:00 AM
O
O
M
10:OO AM
r
n
o
N'
7
N
(D
Q
v
11:00 AM
'
m
2
v
12:OO PM
c
0
3
0 O 0
O
O
O 0 O
0
0
rD
rD
Leq(h), dBA
v
C
cn
1:00:00 PM
1:24:00 PM
^
1:48:00 PM
` J
2:12:00 PM
C/)
2:36:00 PM
3:00:00 PM
3:24:00 PM
3:48:00 PM
4:12:00 PM
4:36:00 PM
5:00:00 PM
5:24:00 PM
5:48:00 PM
6:12:00 PM
6:36:00 PM
7:00:00 PM
7:24:00 PM
7:48:00 PM
8:12:00 PM
8:36:00 PM
9:00:00 PM
9:24:00 PM
9:48:00 PM
10:12:00 PM
10:36:00 PM
11:00:00 PM
11:24:00 PM
11:48:00 PM
12:12:00 AM
y 12:36:00AM
1:00:00 AM
W 1:24:00 AM
1:48:00 AM
2:12:00 AM
2:36:00 AM
3:00:00 AM
3:24:00 AM
3:48:00 AM
4:12:00 AM
4:36:00 AM
5:00:00 AM
5:24:00 AM
5:48:00 AM
6:12:00 AM
6:36:00 AM
7:00:00 AM
7:24:00 AM
7:48:00 AM
8:12:00 AM
8:36:00 AM
9:00:00 AM
9:24:00 AM
9:48:00 AM
10:12:00 AM
10:36:00 AM
11:00:00 AM
11:24:00 AM
11:48:00 AM
12:12:00 PM
12:36:00 PM
dBA (Leq, 1-min)
O O O O O O O O
fD m s'
a m
a z
m a)
N
\ m
0
0
3
z A ar
� A A
N o c
D
CD
a 0
ai O
O %;
SF 90
CD n
o
3 s
aa)
3
0
0
0
N
A
2
z
F, CO
G1
Ln
v�
3 C.
K
m
=
o
c
v
mQ
N
3
=
M
m
0
3
O
m
1
O
�a
20
ao
m
to
G
A
0
3
a
v
v
co
<
m
3
-n
c
Q
CD
7
0
7
oa
N
r
(D yO
N
Q'
O
o
(
N
z v
r
3
Q
c
w
�'
m N
X
�•
0 -
7
m
N
o
N
0
n
m
Q
ID'
r
3
v
3
N
fu
5'
o
c
m
3
m
0
m
F
ai
m
17
Leq(h), dBA
a
H
v
n
0
m
O!
C
O 0 0 O O
0 0 0
Cr.
cn
1
1:00 PM
\ /
z
A
ar
(/)
2:00 PM
A
3:00 PMCD
4:00 PM
a
v
O
0
o
-
SF
90
5:00 PM
N
CD
o
El
7
S
6:00 PM
is
ff)
3
O
7:00 PM
W
w
O
O_
8:00 PM
00
?
Cn
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
rn
s°
rn
11:00 PM
A
w
2
z
y 12:00 AM
e
2
CO
o�
Ln
rt
m
s
O'
c
N
N
1
1:00 AM
a
fD
s
°0
CL
o
�
0
20
-q
o°_m
2:00 AM
to
3:00 AM
y
is
A
°
7
C.
4:00 AM
?'
co
A
T
5:00 AM
a
w
i„
Q
c
O
ao
6:00 AM
m
<
N
7:00 AM
7
N
o
o
ro
8:00 AM
Z
C
3,
9:OO AM
io
�
o
°
C
10:00 AM
CD
c
ai
11:00 AM
7
CL
N
i
1
ao
c
rD
v,
12:00 PM
m
rt
o
v
fu
3
�O
G
fp
O O O O O O
O
O
O
rD
fD
Leq(h), dBA
N
O
1:00:00 PM
1:24:00 PM
1:48:00 PM
2:12:00 PM
2:36:00 PM
3:00:00 PM
3:24:00 PM
3:48:00 PM
4:12:00 PM
4:36:00 PM
5:00:00 PM
5:24:00 PM
5:48:00 PM
6:12:00 PM
6:36:00 PM
7:00:00 PM
7:24:00 PM
7:48:00 PM
8:12:00 PM
8:36:00 PM
9:00:00 PM
9:24:00 PM
9:48:00 PM
10:12:00 PM
10:36:00 PM
11:00:00 PM
11:24:00 PM
11:48:00 PM
12:12:00 AM
y 12:36:00AM
1:00:00 AM
W 1:24:00 AM
1:48:00 AM
2:12:00 AM
2:36:00 AM
3:00:00 AM
3:24:00 AM
3:48:00 AM
4:12:00 AM
4:36:00 AM
5:00:00 AM
5:24:00 AM
5:48:00 AM
6:12:00 AM
6:36:00 AM
7:00:00 AM
7:24:00 AM
7:48:00 AM
8:12:00 AM
8:36:00 AM
9:00:00 AM
9:24:00 AM
9:48:00 AM
10:12:00 AM
10:36:00 AM
11:00:00 AM
11:24:00 AM
11:48:00 AM
12:12:00 PM
12:36:00 PM
d8A (Leq, 1-min)
w is cn a) -4 w c0 0
O O O O O O O O
m m
am
z
m v
3
0
fD
0
3
z A ar
� A A
N O �
N
D
CD
a 0
ai 0
O q
SF 90
CD n
o
3 s
aa)
3
0
0
0
N
A
2
z
F,
CO
G1 Ln
v�
3
C.
0
m
Q
3
c v
3 =
m
M
o
N
m 0
Q
1
0
20
�a
m
ao
to
O
A
0
3
a
D
N
v
00
co
C
6
-n
—
3
V)
Q
w
v
c
0
0
oa
�
Q'
O
o
ru
rD
z v
r
c.
m
X
o
0 -
C:
c N
r
f1
�
Q
as
N
v
�
r
c
m
p
v
3
r=r
�
[1
m
2.
m
Temperature (°F)
4 O N Ul v O N cn -4
CA o cn o 'v, o cn o cn
c'o
�o
oF,
Oa 00
O
�O J
00
r�
O
�0 pj
O 00
t�
0
O 0
0;P O
O
O 00
c�
b
00
O
�� 0
v0 O 00
� O
`Jo so
r'6, v?
b 00
b
s
0 00
0
�0 01
O� 00
b
�0 00
0� 00
0
O� 00
Off,
00
Wind Speed (mp/h)
O N A 0') CO O N A
Appendix B:
Traffic Noise Modeling Output
N
c�
D
m
CD
CD
M.
�a
aNi
m
m
�
>
m
j
m
0
N
Po
CD
m
s
m
m
s
F
o
CD
o
�
CD
0
0
z
N
N
r
J
A
W
c0
4
W
z
rn
A
N
U)
r
o
cn
owo
m
Oo
N
U)
Z7
A
W
m
W
-4
r
J
W
m
N
c0
O
m
o
rn
�
rn
w
A
O
A
m
O
r,
A
O
r
z
ao
m
-0
0
o
O A
0
0
2
U)
o
-
r O
m
0
o
0
O
2
N
r D
"
0
0
cn
0
0
G) cf)
0
0
Appendix C:
SounclPLAN Reference Data
2895 La Quinta Resort & Club 9
Assessed contribution level - 001 - 2895 La Quinta Resort &
Source
Isource type
Leq,d
dB(A)
Receiver R1 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 46.7 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d)
0.0 dB(A)
Water Slide
Line
42.5
Water Slide
Line
41.5
Pool
Area
40.9
Pool
Area
32.7
Pool
Area
22.4
Seating
Area
18.4
Seating
Area
17.6
Seating
Area
17.1
Seating
Area
16.4
Seating
Area
15.5
Seating
Area
1 13.9
Receiver R2 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 42.5 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d)
0.0 dB(A)
Pool
Area
39.3
Water Slide
Line
36.9
Water Slide
Line
33.7
Pool
Area
32.1
Pool
Area
16.4
Seating
Area
15.6
Seating
Area
15.0
Seating
Area
14.2
Seating
Area
12.9
Seating
Area
11.3
Seating
Area
7.4
Receiver R3 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 53.1 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d)
0.0 dB(A)
Water Slide
Line
49.2
Pool
Area
47.8
Water Slide
Line
46.5
Pool
Area
40.21
SeatinglArea
33.21
Seating
Area
30.0
SeatinglArea
26.1I
Seating
Area
23.8
Seating
Area
23.4
Pool
Area
20.3
Seating
Area
17.6
Receiver R4 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 52.6 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d)
0.0 dB(A)
Water Slide
Line
49.5
Water Slide
Line
48.7
Pool
Area
40.8
Pool
Area
36.1
Seating
Area
25.8
Seating
Area
22.9
Seating
Area
20.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S Gilbert Rd Chandler AZ 85249 USA
SoundPLAN 9.0
2895 La Quinta Resort & Club 9
Assessed contribution level - 001 - 2895 La Quinta Resort &
Source
Sourcetypel
Leq,d
dB(A)
SeatinglArea
1 18.3
Seating
Area
16.8
Pool
Area
14.7
SeatinglArea
9.2
Receiver R5 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 45.1 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d) 0.0 dB(A)
Water Slide
Line
40.2
Water Slide
Line
40.0
Pool
Area
39.7
Pool
Area
33.7
Seating
Area
17.0
Pool
Area
17.0
Seating
Area
15.0
Seating
Area
13.6
Seating
Area
13.3
Seating
Area
12.4
Seating
Area
0.2
Receiver R6 FI G Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 57.0 dB(A)
Sigma(Leq,d) 0.0 dB(A)
Water Slide
Line
53.8
Water Slide
Line
52.8
Pool
Area
46.1
Pool
Area
44.0
SeatinglArea
31.1
SeatinglArea
I 30.01
Pool
Area
28.7
SeatinglArea
27.2
SeatinglArea
I 23.61
SeatinglArea
I 23.01
SeatinglArea
1 16.4
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S Gilbert Rd Chandler AZ 85249 USA 2
SoundPLAN 9.0
0
I
N
N
CD
CD
CD
CD
CDCD
0
0
0
N
o
0
0
�
coco
a
co
n
Co
ca
cc
ri
Q
CD
m
r
r
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
(D
(D
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
-
m
A
N
A
O
W
N
-
A
0A
41
O
(P
N
V
CT
(D
O
Cb
CD
V
(O(��
D
N
W
0)
N
A
N
CNO
ul
N
a
A
a
cu
D -
0.
coo
W
W
N
cn
O
2
W r
CVO
POW
p
p
CWfi
(O
co
A
W
?
O
Io
?
O
O
O
D
ID
CO
V
V
V
V
V
V
O
V
CO
(1
W
Gl
Ul
(TI
Gt
C)1
CTl
Ul
Gl
N
V
W
r2
WW
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
a
CT
CT
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W —
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
Q
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W 1
0
W �
v
1
1
n .-0
0 �1
n .-0
0 X
0 .m
0 x
00
0)0
0 O
m
CD
m
m
0
C
03
am
�.
3
E
N=
N=
N
CDN
C
C
C
C
C
N=
'o
'O
N Ol
N 91
N N
N Ol
N N
N Ol
Q
J
0
m
rnCD
>
> CD
> CD
> CD
> CD
> CD
0
3
3
3
CD
o
m
3
a
a
a
a
a
°
2N0
°
0a
(
(n
m
m
(
(n
m
m
N
N
a
CO
c0
J
V
V
V
V
V
O
V
(O
o
W O
CP
CT
(n
CT
C71
(P
CP
N
N
V
W
D 2
0
0
o
O
O
O
O
O
co
A
cn
O
0
rt
p1
CD
N
CD
0
rt
O
h
rt
CD
cn
O
0
CD
N_ CN/NM�
•
CD
ul
Wr
D
o �•
N �
00 (j)
,C,Dw O
V,
Ro
00
�• is
rF
CD
/�
cn
O
rtM
90
c
cr
O
c
rt
0
0
cn
W
Appendix D:
Construction Noise Modeling Output
m
n
m m
G1
n W
fn m G) 4 p L)
(n
p
4
Q
(n
4
n p m p
0
O
d D
D
d
v
C
n n d 0 7o
n
o
d
y
0 o x m
n
tD
tOi
N m
N
7
7 r
O_ n fp D
U
ry
n
Q
m
n
ry w K
j
Q
fD
O
O O
C
fD
O
O
A
O
ry
w 0
O)
(D
p
0
m
-0
ro 0
c
O
v
0
0
N
S
(D S
H
n
(D
m
m
-a
3
CD
7
O
O
O
N
N
F-`
O O F+ F+
F+
O
O
O
fD
3
fD
D 3
(D r
00
V
V
00
V
00
V
cow
w w w
w
00
00
00
OD
00
lD w 00
3
O
lD
V
1
A
A
In
F'
A F-' In A
N
A
N
A
In
A
O N F-`
fl. w
0o x
D �
0
�u m
f
(D (D
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w w w w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w w w
O O
W
O
W
O
0
W
O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W W W W
O O O O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W
O
W W W
O O O
� cn
(D N
(o 0
m CD
(D
(nD m
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A A A A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A A A'
W
w
W
W
W
W
W
W
w w W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
w W w
O O
In
N
In
In
w
w
w
w
In In In In
W
w
w
111
w
w
In In N
(D D
(D
O
(
3
fJ
O
A
O
In
O
N
O
A
O
A
O
fJ
O
�+
0)
A A A A
O O O O
A
O
A
O
A
O
A
O
A
O
A
O
fJ A -D,
O O O
i�
(D N
7 �
r
rD
(D
O
7
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O O
T
n
O
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O O O
O
r
m
O
O
O
O
0
m
O
O O o
p�
(D
D
N
A
A
A
N
r
A A A A
A
of
A
A
A
A
N
A
N A A
O
O
0
0
O
O
O
m
O O O O
O
c
O
O
O
O
c
O
O O o
d
3
3
n
0
r N
3 (nD
0)
0)
0)
Dl
0)
Ln
0)
Ol 0) 0)
O
0)
01
O
m
m
V
m
V Ol
X a
W
N
O
J
V
00
A
00 W V
In
4D
V
OD
W
V
W U,
O
0)
0)
0
0
0
0
a)
cn
0)
0 0 0 C) 0
0
O
O
O
O
O
m
m
m Ol 0
Q
D (D
s
rD
r n
0
In
to
In
Ol
J O
O
M
A
In
Ol 0) 0)
m O O
In
M
01
of Ol Ol U'I O
a
O
A
N
Q1
N
In
N
A
l0 O
O
F+
N
lD
N
A
W
N F+
co O O N N
lD
N
W O
O
F+
N
N
N
F-� A O
lD N N N O
w~
D I
3
w
W
W
Ln
Ln
w
O 1 o O
o I O
0 0 0o
��p
N N I 011 N
VIBRATION LEVEL IMPACT
Project: LQ Pool Renovation Date: 2/13/26
Source: Vibratory Roller
Scenario: Unmitigated
Location: North Residential Building
Address: La Quinta, CA
PPV = PPVref(25/D)An (in/sec)
DATAINPUT
Equipment = 1 Vibratory Roller INPUT SECTION IN BLUE
Type
PPVref = 0.21 Reference PPV (in/sec) at 25 ft.
D = 330.00 Distance from Equipment to Receiver (ft)
n = 1.10 Vibration attenuation rate through the ground
Note: Based on reference equations from Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, 2006, pgs 38-43.
DATA OUT RESULTS
PPV = 0.012 IN/SEC OUTPUT IN RED