The URL can be used to link to this page

2022 07 05 Council Special Mtg - Coral Mtn ResortCITY COUNCIL Page 1 of 1 JULY 5, 2022 SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL TO THE MEMBERS OF THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL AND TO THE CITY CLERK: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the La Quinta City Council is hereby called to be held on Tuesday, July 5, 2022, at 4:00 p.m., at La Quinta City Hall located at 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 for the following purpose: PUBLIC HEARING: 1. CONTINUED FROM JUNE 7, 2022: CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019- 0010, SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC PLAN 2020-0002, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005, AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310); LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60, AND EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET Dated: July 1, 2022 /s/Linda Evans LINDA EVANS, Mayor Attest: MONIKA RADEVA, City Clerk DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Monika Radeva, City Clerk, do hereby declare that the foregoing notice for the City Council special meeting of July 5, 2022, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber at 78495 Calle Tampico and on the bulletin boards at 51321 Avenida Bermudas and 78630 Highway 111 on July 1, 2022. MONIKA RADEVA, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 1 of 3 JULY 5, 2022 SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2022, AT 4:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Councilmembers: Fitzpatrick, Peña, Radi, Sanchez, Mayor Evans PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA At this time, members of the public may address the City Council on any matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes (approximately 350 words). The City Council values your comments; however, in accordance with State law, no action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda unless it is an emergency item authorized by Cal. Government Code § 54954.2(b). CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS – 4:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter For all Public Hearings on the agenda, a completed “Request to Speak” form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to consideration of that item; comments are limited to three minutes (approximately 350 words). Any person may submit written comments to City Council before a public hearing or appear in support or opposition to the approval of a project(s). If you challenge a project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those City Council agendas and staff reports are available on the City’s web page: www.LaQuintaCA.gov CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 2 of 3 JULY 5, 2022 SPECIAL MEETING issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. ADDITIONAL SPECIAL NOTICE FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1: In accordance with State law and City rules of procedure for conducting public meetings, the Mayor will preside over the continued Public Hearing Item No. 1 relating to the proposed Coral Mountain Resort project. Subject to any decisions issued by the Mayor at the meeting, all members of the public are welcome to speak during this continued public hearing on July 5, 2022; provided, however, that members of the public who previously spoke or previously submitted written comments, or both, during the public hearing for this item on June 7, 2022, are requested to refrain from providing duplicate comments. All verbal and written comments submitted prior to or during the public hearing for this item on June 7, 2022, are in the administrative record and are already available to Council for review. PAGE 1. CONTINUED FROM JUNE 7, 2022: CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010, SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC PLAN 2020-0002, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005, AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310); LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60, AND EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET 5 MAYOR’S AND COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ITEMS ADJOURNMENT ********************************* The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on July 19, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 3 of 3 JULY 5, 2022 SPECIAL MEETING DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Monika Radeva, City Clerk, of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta City Council meeting was posted on the City’s website, near the entrance to the Council Chambers at 78495 Calle Tampico, and the bulletin boards at the Stater Brothers Supermarket at 78630 Highway 111, and the La Quinta Cove Post Office at 51321 Avenida Bermudas, on June 30, 2022. DATED: June 30, 2022 MONIKA RADEVA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California Public Notices  The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk’s office at (760) 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made.  If background material is to be presented to City Council during a City Council meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the City Clerk for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the meeting.  Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item(s) on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall located at 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253, during normal business hours. City of La Quinta CITY COUNCIL MEETING: July 5, 2022 STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: CONTINUED FROM JUNE 7, 2022: CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2019-0010, SPECIFIC PLAN 2019-0003 (AMENDMENT V TO ANDALUSIA SPECIFIC PLAN), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2019-0002, ZONE CHANGE 2019-0004, SPECIFIC PLAN 2020- 0002, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2021-0002 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2019-0005, AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST; CEQA: CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2021020310); LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 58, NORTH OF AVENUE 60, AND EAST AND WEST OF MADISON STREET RECOMMENDATION Request a summary of items applicant is working on during continuance and provide any additional comments or direction as appropriate and continue the hearing to a date certain: either September 20, 2022, or an alternative Special Meeting date in September. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council considered the Coral Mountain Resort project at a duly noticed public hearing on June 7, 2022; the public hearing remained open and Council continued consideration of the item to a Special Meeting on July 5, 2022. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS On June 7, 2022, Council considered the Coral Mountain Resort project at a duly noticed public hearing and received: 1) a complete presentation of the staff report, studies, and findings for the project, 2) a presentation from the applicant, and 3) extensive public testimony, both verbal and written comments. The public hearing remained open and the Council continued consideration of the item to the July 5, 2022 special meeting at 4:00 p.m. The staff report and all attachments are provided at the following link: https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/46825/637921966297358380 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 5 On June 29, 2022, the applicant’s representative requested that the application be continued to the first available meeting in September (Attachment 1). That meeting date would be September 20, 2022. The Council may wish to consider holding a Special Meeting for the project, rather than continuing to a regular meeting. Prepared by: Danny Castro, Design and Development Director Approved by: Jon McMillen, City Manager Attachments: 1.Email from James Vaughn, Esq., on behalf of the Applicant, dated June 29, 2022 2.June 7, 2022, staff report, resolutions, ordinances and all attachments can be accessed at: https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/46825/637921966297358380 3.Public Comments received June 8 through June 30, 2022 6 Page 1 of 1 Subject:Request to Con+nue July 5, 2022 City Council Hearing on Coral Mountain Resort Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:35:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:James Vaughn To:Jon McMillen, Ihrke, Bill, Nicole Criste CC:Cheri Flores, Danny Castro, John Gamlin, GarreM Simon, 'gculp@meriwetherco.com', 'Depala+s, Paul', 'Rowe, Mike', Witherspoon, Michelle, Tony Locacciato - Meridian Consultants LLC (tlocacciato@meridianconsultantsllc.com), Rick Zeilenga AIachments:image001.jpg Jon, Bill and Nicole, We need 60 days to complete our evalua+on and responses to the comments we heard at the City Council mee+ng on June 7th and our mee+ng today with Lisa Castro and Alena Callimanis. Accordingly, we are reques+ng that the City postpone the hearing on the Coral Mountain Resort project currently scheduled for July 5, 2022, and con+nue it to the first available mee+ng in September. Please let me know if you have any ques+ons. Thanks, Jim James D. Vaughn, Esq. Stowell, Zeilenga, Ruth, Vaughn & Treiger LLP jvaughn@szrlaw.com l www.szrlaw.com Office: 805.446.1496 l Direct: 805.446.7609 l Mobile 805.551.0688 4695 MacArthur Court 4590 East Thousand Oaks Blvd. Suite 200 Suite 100 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Westlake Village, California 91362 ATTACHMENT 1 7 ATTACHMENT 2 June 7, 2022, staff report, resolutions, ordinances, and all attachments can be accessed using the link below: https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/46825/637921966297358380 8 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Thursday, June 9, 2022 2:33 PM To:Tania Flores Subject:Fw: Wave Park Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 11:09 AM To: Eve Castles ; Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Wes Castles ; Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Re: Wave Park Ms. Castles, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Eve Castles Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 8:34 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Wes Castles Subject: Re: Wave Park EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. PLEASE STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE FOR WATER USE - FOR THIS PROJECT AND OTHERS. VOTE NO. Hot off the presses just 3 hours ago. https://www.sfchronicle.com/climate/article/California-orders-thousands-of-farms-and-cities-17225970.php California orders thousands of farms and cities, including San Francisco, to stop pumping water during drought (msn.com) ATTACHMENT 3 9 2 The Coachella valley needs to re-think ALL of our water use, not becoming the laughing stock. VOTE NO. Eve Castles On Apr 30, 2022, at 7:16 PM, Eve Castles wrote: Dear La Quinta City Council Members - I’m writing in opposition to the proposed Wave Park. My husband and I moved to La Quinta in February, drawn by the quiet, low key vibe of South La Quinta. We were attracted to the quality of the people, the aesthetics, and amenities. Early risers, we were lulled into appreciation of the quiet, star-filled nights. We didn’t purchase a home in Palm Springs, Palm Desert or any of the other cities with more ‘action’ for a reason. Imagine our surprise when we discovered a Wave Park and resort might be moving in just over a mile away from us. And the amusement park would stay open until 10 pm every night? HELP!!! Do any of you live within 2 miles of the proposed wave park? If the answer is no, please think how you would feel if the development were proposed in your neighborhood …. We opposed the wave park development for several reasons: 1) Light and noise pollution (Let’s talk noise mitigation for a minute: noise will bounce off of Coral Mountain and go right over any retaining walls. There was no mention of berms to absorb any sound). 2) Too many short term vacation rentals 3) Increased traffic down Madison and Monroe 4)Water use inappropriate for our area. PLEASE take a step back for a moment. Does a wave park really belong in the desert? The answer is no. PLEASE preserve our sense of quiet and peace in South La Quinta (said while listening to the StageCoach concert 1.5 miles down the road in the other direction). WATER is for drinking, bathing and use inside the house. We need to shift our paradigm view of water and water use! Start with this project and vote NO! Thank you for listening. Eve Castles 10 3 Eve and Wes Castles La Quinta CA 92253 SIDE NOTE: As a landscape designer, I see lots of areas for improvements of water use in the Coachella Valley. Water is a scarce resource for California and is becoming even more so. Growing up in the SF Bay Area, I lived close to cities like Palo Alto, Los Altos, Redwood City - all named for their stately redwoods. Our annual rainfall was typically between 18-22 inches of rain. Since 2010, the average rainfall in the San Jose area has been 8.6 inches per year. Eight of every 10 redwoods is declining or dead at the lower elevations. The temperatures are too hot and there is not enough water for them to survive. It is painful to watch the number of other trees, also in decline. Eve Castles Landscape Design & Outdoor Living Find me on Houzz 11 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Monday, June 13, 2022 8:31 AM To: Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Bartlett, Tracy: Thank you - Coral Mountain Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up Flag Status:Flagged Good morning Ms. Bartlett, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Tracy Bartlett Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 10:03 AM To: Council <Council@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Thank you EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Madam Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, members of the City Council, Thank you for the opportunity to speak during the public comment period regarding the Coral Mountain Wave Park project at last night’s council meeting. I appreciate all of the your hard work, time and dedication to our wonderful community of La Quinta. As a certified Climate Steward and Naturalist, my focus is on helping our community become more climate resilient to the effects of climate change, not only for residents and visitors, but for our surrounding native desert ecosystem. I especially appreciated Mayor Pro Tem Fitzpatrick’s regional and long term approach to the issues facing our community. As I indicated last night, a Community Climate Action Plan, involving input from all stakeholders, would further enhance the livability and visitor experience to such a special place. Again, thank you for your leadership and allowing me to be a part of the process. Sincerely, Tracy L. Bartlett Certified Climate Steward and California Naturalist CactusToCloud Institute Sent from Mail for Windows 12 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Thursday, June 9, 2022 3:58 PM To:Pat Stacy Cc:Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro; Tania Flores Subject:Re: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Support Pat, Thank you for the revised comments. They will be provided to the Council. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Pat Stacy Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2022 8:03 AM To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov>; Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Support EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Good morning Nicole I'm so sorry about the misnaming of the city. We have a bad habit of referring to the general area as Palm Springs. I dont know if you would accept a revised letter, but i pasted one below with the appropriate city name. I also revised wave pool to wave basin as its a more fitting word for it. Thank you all again and have a great day! Good morning La Quinta city council members. I hope my email finds you well and I also hope I’m not too late as I know you all met yesterday regarding the Coral Mountain resort project. I am one of the staff photographers at the Kelly Slater wave basin in Lemoore, California, which I imagine you’ve been informed of, but for those of you who maybe haven’t, it is the prototype and the only wave basin in existence that uses the technology that will be used at Coral Mountain. I live in Orange County and have worked at the Kelly Slater wave basin in lemoore for 5 years. Surfing has been at the foundation of my life since I started at the age of 5. At 39 years old, I love it and appreciate it more today than ever before. It is sacred to me. One of the things I’ve enjoyed most about working at the wave basin in Lemoore has been witnessing the life changing experiences people have every day there. People have these experiences in the ocean, but they are quite a bit harder to come by due to all the elements we encounter out at sea. In the wave basin, every single day, most guests experience something that they will never forget. I’ve seen people tear up as they watch their elderly mom or dad stand up on a wave for the first time in their life. 13 2 I’ve seen people with disabilities that keep them from the ocean, experience the thrill of riding the first wave of their life. I’ve seen people get their first tube and come out screaming uncontrollably from exhilaration. Basically, this new technology we’re experiencing in lemoore makes people the very best version of themselves and I promise you that if you allow this to come to your beautiful town, you will have a population of people there who are floating around town elated and in awe of what they had experienced that day. This wave technology is new to us all, but I can tell you from experience, that it is a blessing to anyone who gets in the water. It’s even a thrill to watch from the sidelines. In lemoore, the culture we’ve had from the start have been rooted in gratitude and respect for this blessing we’re all a part of. With humility and respect to you all, I encourage you to allow this beautiful place to come to life in your town. Thank you for your time Pat Stacy On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 11:15 AM Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> wrote: Pat, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Please note, however, that the project is in the City of La Quinta, not the City of Palm Springs. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Pat Stacy Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 10:16 AM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Support EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Good morning Palm Springs city council members. I hope my email finds you well and I also hope I’m not too late as I know you all met yesterday regarding the Coral Mountain resort project. I am one of the staff photographers at the Kelly Slater wave pool in lemoore, california, which I imagine you’ve been informed of, but for those of you who maybe haven’t, it is the prototype and the only pool in existence that uses the technology that will be used at Coral Mountain. I live in Orange County and have worked at the Kelly Slater wave pool in lemoore for 5 years. Surfing has been at the foundation of my life since I started at the age of 5. At 39 years old, I love it and appreciate more today than ever before. It is sacred to me. One of the things I’ve enjoyed most about working at the pool in lemoore has been witnessing the life changing experiences people have every day in that pool. People have these experiences in the ocean, but they are quite a bit harder to come by due to all the elements we encounter out at sea. In the wave pool, every single day, most guests experience something that they will never forget. I’ve seen people tear up as they watch their elderly mom or dad stand up on a wave for the first time in their life. I’ve seen people with disabilities that keep them from the ocean, experience the thrill of riding the first wave of their life. 14 3 I’ve seen people get their first tube and come out screaming uncontrollably from exhilaration. Basically, this new technology we’re experiencing in lemoore makes people the very best version of themselves and I promise you that if you allow this to come to you’re beautiful town, you will have a population of people there who are floating around town elated and in awe of what they had experienced that day. This pool is new to us all, but I can tell you from experience, that it is a blessing to anyone who gets in the water. It’s even a thrill to watch from the sidelines. In lemoore, the culture we’ve had from the start have been rooted in gratitude and respect for this blessing we’re all a part of. With humility and respect to you all, I encourage you to allow this beautiful place to come to life in your town. Thank you for your time Pat Stacy 15 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Friday, June 10, 2022 1:36 PM To:Gary De Bay; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro Cc:Tania Flores Subject:Re: Coral Mountain Development Master Plan & the KSWC Wave Project - Support from EXPLOR Ventures/Powered by NIKE Ventures Innovation Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up Flag Status:Flagged Mr. De Bay, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Council when they consider the matter at hearing. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Gary De Bay Sent: Friday, June 10, 2022 12:47 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Gary De Bay Subject: Coral Mountain Development Master Plan & the KSWC Wave Project - Support from EXPLOR Ventures/Powered by NIKE Ventures Innovation EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Dear City Planning Commission, Council & Staff I wanted to send an email in support of the Coral Mountain resort development and master plan related to our relationship since 2009 with Kelly Slater Wave Company and in recent years with the World Surf League and Meriwether Development. My apologies for not getting this to you in advance of your June 7th session. The proposed Coral Mountain project is a great mixed-use development alternative model for the Coachella Valley and the City of La Quinta versus the standard golf-course and pool/tennis club developments in your area and elsewhere all across the country. By diversifying beyond a traditional golf course developer residential model via a resort development master plan with a focus on action sports and outdoor recreation facilities, you will attract more young families with kids as residential owners and extended stay guests. 16 2 We have been working since 2003 with local communities, city planners, recreation department staffs, resort owners and private land owners on very similar mixed-use sports and active lifestyle redevelopment projects across a broad range of urban, suburban and resort sites under a similar public-private development model. For all of our mixed-use sports and active lifestyle community projects in Colorado, Texas, California, Oregon, Florida and Arizona, our master plans have included a Kelly Slater Wave Company facility as an ideal training, recreation and competitive amenity to make surfing accessible to everyone beyond the coast. The Coral Mountain current development plan fills a large gap in your local community and amenity options to attract an active, outdoor lifestyle younger resident and multi-sport, guest population to your area. I would encourage you to support the CM plan to increase the diversity and overall appeal of your city. And to make it a unique destination for family-oriented vacation travel and future home ownership. We have found that a lot of avid surfers are also avid golfers. Many of the families and guests that Coral Mountain attracts to your city will also be future customers for your local golf courses, local businesses and restaurants as well. Thank you for your consideration of the Coral Mountain development model as a valuable residential resort and multi-sports facility amenity for your city. Cheers, Gary GARY De BAY President & Co-Founder EXPLOR Ventures LLC Powered by NIKE Ventures Innovation Boulder, Colorado USA C: 1+720.272.1249 / E: gary@explorventures.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/explorventures1 17 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Tuesday, June 14, 2022 10:28 AM To:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores Cc:Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Winnor, Carolyn Coral Mountain Resort - Information - CVWD, Drought, Colorado River Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Please include in the project record. Thank you. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 8:48 AM To: Carolyn Winnor Cc: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; bihrke@rutan.com Subject: RE: Coral Mountain Resort - Information - CVWD, Drought, Colorado River Carolyn, Thank you for taking the time to express your views on the Coral Mountain project. Although council members cannot pre-determine how we will vote on a project, I can assure you that as a lifelong desert resident I take very seriously the effects of any project that comes before the city council, it's impact on our natural resources, the environment, traffic, crime and public safety and benefit to the community. As with all items that come before the council, I will consider all the information presented by all interested parties for this project. Also, for future reference, please feel free to send or copy the City Clerk’s Office so that your communications can conveniently be included as part of the record for correspondence received in connection with this project, which can be sent to: CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov. Thank you again for reaching out to share your concerns. 18 2 John Peña | Member of the City Council City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760.777.7030 www.laquintaca.gov www.playinlaquinta.com From: Carolyn Winnor Sent: Monday, June 13, 2022 6:53 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>; City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Resort - Information - CVWD, Drought, Colorado River EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Good Evening The Desert Sun article, dated June 9, 2022, stated, the La Quinta City Council delayed making a decision on the proposed 386 acre wave basin as its centerpiece because council members said they still have key questions, mostly related to water usage and the dire drought outlook after listening to staff, the developer and residents. At the end of the meeting the City Council asked the Consulting Planner and the Planning Department to contact CVWD to get updated information on the drought. The Consulting Planner, Planning Department and Developer continue to agree that CVWD did a conservative estimate of the water supply for the next 20 years. I believe you need the additional information I provided in this email to help you make an informed decision Axios Article dated June 10, 2022 https://www.axios.com/2022/06/10/drought-discovered-severe- colorado-river I have copied a portion of this article below and encourage you to read it: “A new study out Thursday sheds new light on the drought history of the Colorado River Basin, and only adds to current concerns about the ongoing Southwest megadrought.” 19 3 “Driving the news: Based on tree-ring records of historical streamflow in the Upper Colorado River Basin, the study uncovered a drought in the second century that was more severe than the ongoing 22-year region-wide drought event.” •The recently discovered 24-year drought between 129-150 CE likely ranks as the most severe drought in the past 2,000 years for this region, the study finds. “Why it matters: The newly found drought stands as an example of how much worse things can get, driven by natural climate fluctuations alone. If such a drought were to occur today, it would undoubtedly be even worse, researchers told Axios, due to the added effects of human-driven climate change.” •In addition, the results would be catastrophic, given the demand for water and energy in the booming Southwest. “The big picture: Right now, the entire West is experiencing drought conditions, not just part of the Colorado River Basin. Ninety-percent of New Mexico is in the two worst drought categories, and 60% of California and 55% of Nevada are in the same situation, for example. All of each of these states are in some form of drought as of this week.” •California just had its driest first five months of a year on record, raising fears about the upcoming wildfire season. Desert Sun Article dated March 25, 2022 “Could drought derail Surf Parks, Lagoons?” “The high end projects being proposed and approved while low income largely Latino residents in mobile home parks at the eastern edge of the valley, in some cases not far from new luxury projects, continue to live with contaminated wells or no running water.” “Water officials say state laws and policies leave them no choice. Under Proposition 218, passed by voters in 1996 to limit potential tax dollar abuse, they cannot use a dime of hefty reserves to hook up low-income communities that can’t afford to pay for new pipes.” “At the same time, they say they must issue “will serve” letters to new projects that can afford the infrastructure if city councils, planning commissions or the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approve them, as long as a careful assessments show they will have enough supply on hand for 20 years for the project.” “Unless there’s a huge change in state water laws, that’s the law as written said CVWD, Lorraine Garcia.” State could ban new construction hook-ups “The California Water Resources Control Board could halt water hook-ups for new construction here or anywhere else in the state under emergency provisions of health and safety codes.” “The State Water Board has authority to initiate a connection ban on new water connections to a public water system in extreme cases where there is a danger of a water outage due to inadequate source capacity” said spokeswoman Jackie Carpenter. “However, she said the board would probably only do so on a selective basis, after other measures failed.” “But Carpenter said that local governments can take action on their own.” Careful planning for all types of service 20 4 “Local water officials say they have planned carefully to ensure supply is available long-term for all types of projects. CVWD and other water districts sent updated ground water sustainability plans to the California Department of Water Resources by Jan 1, concluding the vast Indio sub-basin aquifer that underlies much of the valley is in good shape, with plenty on tap through 2045.” “Some experts note that the plan relies on increased supplies from the Colorado River and far larger supplies from the State Water Project than are currently being offered. University of Saskatchewan hydrology professor Jay Famiglietti, global water scarcity expert who tracks water in the West, in December called the desert water districts ’strategy “a dream, not a plan”.” Please read the article, I have only quoted portions that I believed might peak your interest. Please open the attachment “ConserveCRW Fact Sheet, from the CVWD” The question for the City Council, how can CVWD put out a fact sheet asking residents to conserve water and yet you would approve Coral Mountain? “Ongoing drought & declining water levels threatening quality of life in the Colorado River Basin….. Colorado River System was 95% full in 2000 vs 35% in 2022 This quote is directly from the CVWD website http://www.cvwd.org/580/Colorado-River-Water- Conservation-Progra “The Colorado River Basin has been in historic drought conditions since the early 2000s. Currently, the combined storage in Lake Powell and Lake Mead are at their lowest levels (below 35%) since Lake Powell initially began filling in the 1960s”. Does the Council believe the Colorado River will continue to provide water for the next 20 years? Will the inflow from the Colorado River keep up with the outflow or will the Coachella Valley pump water from the aquifer until the land subsides? The Council will receive the same answer from CVWD until the drought becomes so severe that the State steps in and stops this wasteful use of a precious resource. CVWD isn’t allowed to give City Planners or City Councils their opinion due to Proposition 218. CVWD Landscape Ordinance No. 3.15.020 “Water feature” means any water applied to the landscape for non-irrigation, decorative purposes. Fountains, streams, ponds and lakes are considered water features. Water features use more water than efficiently irrigated turf grass and are assigned a plant factor of 1.1 for a stationary body of water and 1.2 for a moving body of water. CVWD used the factor of 1.2 for a moving body of water for the evaporation calculation for the Coral Mountain Wave, which is defined as fountains, streams, ponds and lakes. Question: The Wave Pool is considered a “lake”, a moving body of water producing waves up to 6 feet in height, for 15 hours a day, so how can CVWD use the factor of 1.2 for evaporation? The La Quinta City Council will make the final decision. If you vote “YES” and approve this project, you cannot point your finger at CVWD, since you have been given the facts and heard both sides of the issue. The Residents of La Quinta did NOT ask the City to build a Wave Park. 21 5 As a permanent resident of La Quinta I have a question and comments: 1. If the developer’s “chosen experts” are not correct in their findings related to: lighting, noise (sound), traffic, Green House Gases (GHG) and water, where exactly do disgruntled residents go to complain? How difficult or costly would it have been for the Developer to do an actual Sound Test on the proposed property? I am sure it would have been easier and cheaper than their lighting demo. I am sure that the Sound Test would not meet the requirements in the DEIR or EIR. The Developer showed a video of Lemoore at the Council meeting last week, did you hear any background sounds from the Wave Park? NO, you cannot find a video online with Lemoore’s actual background sounds, only videos with voice or music, over the video. WHY? I have attended all the meetings, the Joint Study Meeting, Planning Commission Meetings and last week’s City Council Meeting. I have never been involved in City Planning/Politics but I find extremely disturbing listening to the Developer and his attorney, making false or misleading statements to appease the City Officials. Mr. Gamlin stated last week they were considering installing water recycling equipment, which was brought up by a Council member, another spin on the truth or a bold face lie to say anything that would appease you? Thank you for your time. Carolyn Winnor La Quinta Permanent Resident 22 23 Page 1 of 3 Subject:FW: JUST IN DESERTSUN- FYI-THE WATER FOR CORAL MOUNTAIN SURF PARK IS NOT THERE AND WON'T BE FOR THE FORSEEABLE FUTURE: Date:Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 8:18:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time From:Cheri Flores To:Tania Flores, ConsulQng Planner AGachments:image001.png Public comment. Cheri Flores | Planning Manager Design & Development Department City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. (760)777-7067 CLFlores@LaQuintaCA.gov www.LaQuintaCA.gov From: Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 8:14 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov> Subject: JUST IN DESERTSUN- FYI-THE WATER FOR CORAL MOUNTAIN SURF PARK IS NOT THERE AND WON'T BE FOR THE FORSEEABLE FUTURE: EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and cauQon when opening acachments, clicking links or responding to requests for informaQon. If it wasn't obvious last week. It should be painfully obvious this week. The CORAL MOUNTAIN EIR AND CVWD WSA is not worth the paper it's printed on concerning water availability. The WSA ProjecQons are based on 45% SWP AllocaQons. CVWD has only received 5% for the last 2 years and in the 2023 October 1st Water Year they cannot expect anymore. In fact, since all CVWD water deliveries come from the Colorado River not only are future SWP allotments in jeopardy but the QSA 24 Page 2 of 3 allotments are now in jeopardy based on the Bureau Of ReclamaQon Statements Below. Exactly how is CVWD going to comply with SGMA/GSA mandates to balance ouVlows of the aquifer with inflows if they haven't got a clue as to the future inflows available? Serious consideraQon of this Project's water availability cannot be SERIOUS based on the dire catastrophic Mega-Drought and the complete uncertainty about future Colorado River Water Deliveries. hcps://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2022/06/14/iid-wants-salton-sea-aid-feds-warn- huge-water-cuts-needed-shore-up-lake-mead/7625558001/ Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Touton testified early Tuesday to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Committee that levels at the reservoir have dropped to an all-time low of 28% of capacity, with no relief in sight. "There is so much to this that is unprecedented," Touton said. "But unprecedented is now the reality and the normal in which Reclamation must manage our system, for warmer, drier weather is is what we are facing She issued a veiled warning to Imperial Irrigation District, the Coachella Valley Water District, the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and other districts in the Golden State, Arizona and Nevada that rely on Lake Mead, urging them to complete another major voluntary reduction agreement by mid-August. "Between 2 and 4 million acre feet is 25 Page 3 of 3 needed just to protect critical levels in 2023. It is within our authorities to act unilaterally to protect the system. But today we are pursuing a path of partnership with states and tribes ...that has worked for a century." 26 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Friday, June 17, 2022 7:33 AM To:Kathy Weiss Cc:; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Danny Castro; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Planning WebMail; City Clerk Mail; Tustin Larson - City of La Quinta (cityoflaquinta@gmail.com); John Burgeson- Reporter; Tania Flores Subject:Re: FYI- OutThere NEWS <newsletter@outtherecolorado.com> Ms. Weiss, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Council at their next hearing on the project. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Kathy Weiss Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 9:49 PM Cc: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Planning WebMail <Planning@laquintaca.gov>; City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov>; Tustin Larson - City of La Quinta (cityoflaquinta@gmail.com) <cityoflaquinta@gmail.com>; John Burgeson- Reporter Subject: FYI- OutThere NEWS <newsletter@outtherecolorado.com> EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. 6/16/22 The commissioner for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation told a U.S. Senate committee Tuesday that the seven states of the Colorado River Basin must come up with an emergency deal – and fast – to conserve between 2 and 4 million acre-feet of water in the next year in order to protect the entire Colorado River system. If the seven states fail to agree on a plan, the bureau will step in and impose water cuts on the states, Camille Calimlim Touton warned during a U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources hearing on short and long-term solutions to drought in the Western United States. Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., is a member of that committee. The timeline for the states to come up with an emergency deal for the water reductions is drastic: Touton gave them only 60 days. The commissioner gave her testimony amidst persistent drought conditions that have hammered western states and compelled them to voluntarily reduce their allocations from the Colorado River, which supplies water to nearly 40 million people in cities from Denver to Los Angeles and farmlands from the Rocky Mountains to the U.S.-Mexico border. The river has long been over-allocated, and its reservoirs have 27 2 declined dramatically since 2000 during a severe drought that research shows is being intensified by global warming and that some scientists describe as the long-term “aridification” of the Southwest. Touton underscored the gravity of the challenge, saying it is unlike any other in the bureau's 120-year history. "The science of the system across the West and especially in the Colorado River basin indicate one of immediate action," she said. "But in the Colorado River basin, more conservation and demand management are needed in addition to the actions already underway." Touton's testimony indicated that Colorado might have to resume looking at demand management, a program of compensation for voluntary water use reductions and which the state had put on pause. Four million acre-feet of water is not just a drop in the bucket. Indeed, the magnitude of the cuts to water allocation brought into sharp focus the peril facing the seven states that rely on the Colorado River to provide water to millions of Americans. Andy Mueller, general manager of the Colorado River District, told Colorado Politics the four upper basin states — Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and Wyoming — consume about 3.5 million acre-feet annually from the river. The three lower basin states — California, Nevada and Arizona — consume about 8.5 million acre-feet annually, he said. Even if Nevada and Arizona were to give up their entire annual water allocation from the river, it wouldn't be enough to cover 4 million acre-feet of water. In a statement, head of Arizona's water department called for a "united approach," saying the commissioner's description of the situation "should remove any remaining doubt that the Colorado River states and our federal partners have a duty to take immediate action – no matter how painful - to protect the system from crashing." "I have seen the data Commissioner Touton has seen and I agree with her conclusions," Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department Of Water Resources, said in a statement, adding the states must come up with a proposal and avoid having the federal government take "drastic action unilaterally." Buschatzke also cited U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, who noted Arizona’s “junior” water-rights status and said if his state absorbed the loss of 2 to 4 million acre-feet of water, it would "wipe out water deliveries to cities, tribes and farms in Phoenix and in Tucson.” Touton told the U.S. Senate committee the bureau announced two drought response plans to raise water levels in Lake Powell by 1 million acre-feet within the next year. The first is to release 500,000 acre-feet of water from Utah's Flaming Gorge Reservoir, tied to the drought contingency plan approved by the four upper basin states in 2019. Another 480,000 acre-feet will be left in Lake Powell by reducing Glen Canyon Dam’s annual release volume from 7.48 million acre-feet to 7 million acre-feet, and that's tied to the 2007 interim guidelines that control the operations of both Glen Canyon and Hoover dams. Colorado's Blue Mesa Reservoir in Gunnison County was tapped last year, along with Flaming Gorge and Navajo Reservoir in southwestern Colorado, to put more water into the system to keep electricity going at Lake Powell. Blue Mesa is now at its lowest level since it was first filled in the 1960s, according to Karl Wetlaufer of the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service. It will take significant snow and rainfall to raise those water levels, he said during a meeting of the state's Water Availability Task Force last month. 28 3 Touton noted the bureau has the authority to act unilaterally to protect the system. "And we will protect the system," she said, adding that, for now, the bureau is trying to work cooperatively with the states and tribes in reaching a consensus in the next 60 days. "Faith is not enough. We need to see the action." Demand management, referenced by Touton during her testimony, was a key part of the Drought Contingency Plan the basin states agreed to in 2019. Under the plan, the Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — would look into paying people to conserve water and store it in Lake Powell. Mueller said the four Upper Basin states are already doing their part, reducing consumption from 4.5 million acre-feet to 4 million. "It's been declining because of drought, when the water is not there, either legally or physically," Mueller said, adding ranchers and farmers on the Western Slope are just not taking their full allotment. The push for a new emergency deal to cope with the Colorado River’s shrinking flow comes just seven months after officials from California, Arizona and Nevada signed an agreement to take significantly less water out of Lake Mead, and six weeks after the federal government announced it is holding back a large quantity of water in Lake Powell to reduce risks of the reservoir dropping to a point where Glen Canyon Dam would no longer generate electricity. Despite those efforts and a previous deal among the states to share in the shortages, the two reservoirs stand at or near record-low levels. Lake Mead near Las Vegas has dropped to 28% of its full capacity, while Lake Powell on the Utah-Arizona border is now just 27% full. Ian James of the Los Angeles Times contributed to this report. Kathy D. Weiss Summer Residence , Carbondale, CO 81623 Winter Residence: , La Quinta, CA 92253 29 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Friday, June 24, 2022 3:50 PM To:Consulting Planner Cc:Tania Flores; Monika Radeva; Cheri Flores Subject:Lisa Castro Meeting Request Comments by Lisa Castro below and City’s response included below for the project file record. Thank you. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov> Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 4:49 PM To: Lisa Castro Subject: meeting request Hello Lisa, I was asked by Council to respond to your email requesting a meeting with them and the developer prior to July 5th. Unfortunately this is not possible as this would be considered a public meeting and require the public to be noticed and invited. I tried calling you earlier this afternoon to discuss and will make sure to call back to have a conversation regarding your concerns. Regards jon mcmillen Sent from my iPhone From: Lisa Castro Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 4:34:13 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Surf Park EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Good Afternoon La Quinta City Council Members, Thank you so much for acknowledging my email during the City Council meeting. John, I especially thank you for your time and letting me know that you recognize how this will impact 30 2 me more than anyone else. Please also note that Guillermo Castillo, who lives right across the street from me and the new Cantera development which is the North West Corner are very close to Coral Mountain, on the south side of 58th, and will also be significantly impacted. I wanted to make sure everyone understood that my note I had sent you was not an endorsement of the project. I just wanted to show you that the developer keeps trying to apply their experiences at Lemoore to our area, which is not reasonable. I really wanted to speak on Tuesday, but I am petrified of public speaking. I don’t know if you remember but in September, I just rambled. I hope you will indulge me and let me make the points in this email that I should have said at the last City Council meeting. I would like to schedule a joint meeting with me, John Gamlin, Garrett Simon and the City Council as soon as possible to answer questions that will directly impact me and my property. We must have this meeting before July 5 to understand all of my concerns. My number is Here are some of my issues: 1) There is no question that the 80 foot lights, including the reflection off the water and particulates in the air, all the street and sidewalk lighting along the road right next to my house, will provide constant illumination of my house and will destroy my night sky views. My right to peace and quiet will be permanently destroyed. 2) I heard the Iron Man speaker announcements from Lake Cahuilla very clearly - literally word for word. It was not a windy day. Those speaker announcements here at the surf basin, jet ski noises, wave mechanism noises, people cheering, warning countdown and horn warning blares will impact not only me but all the developments along 58th, Andalusia and Trilogy. Sound carries. The developer continuously tries to say that those noises will be low and stopped by perimeter walls. That might pertain to the wave, but all the speaker announcements and warning horn will be coming from the control tower, 60 or so feet up, so it will be much higher up, because by law they need to make sure surfers will hear them. This will make the sound travel even further than the speaker noise from Coachella. Cheering will be coming from the stands. Those noises will travel far. And as you know, all the tamarisks on the property will be removed for development and all this noise that is reported to be blocked by trees will no longer be stopped. You cannot approve a project that has not done a legitimate noise test on site. 3) Before the LQRRD folks did the air horn test, they did stop to let me know what they were doing so I would not be surprised. At that point, I decided to go onto my back patio to listen for the test and did some recordings myself. When I listened to the recording later, I could hear birds chirping and then the big blare of the air horn, which was more than a quarter of a mile away from me. I can send you the recordings if you wish. I heard the folks say they heard it in Trilogy. I believe it, and I am sure it will be worse since the announcements and warning horns will come from the tower. That is why the developer did not do an actual noise 31 3 test on site. They knew it would show a significant noise impact. These required warning horns will exceed the La Quinta General Plan requirement of 65 decibels because they can go up to 90 decibels. It is required by the State Wave Park Public Safety requirements. And blaring every 5 minutes, from 7AM to 10PM? From high up so that surfers can hear it? This constant noise will be horrible both for me, Cantera residents and all the residents around. It is not a one time deal. If you look at their software based noise test, they averaged the noise between 7AM and 10pm and then they averaged the noise between 10PM and 7PM. That is ridiculous and not valid for this site. Everyone knows sound drops significantly by the afternoon. You heard the evening recordings. I remember John saying he forgot” how dark it gets”. And is so quiet in this area. So the data they used for the noise test was totally invalid. 4) If you look at a map of the development, the north side of the development is almost two miles long. The south side is less than a quarter mile wide because it was the only spot they could put the wave pool because of all the CVWD pipes in this area. They are stuffing so much between my house and Coral Mountain. I am really concerned that this noise will impact the BigHorn Sheep. They are at Lake Cahuilla eating grass and drinking water all summer long in the afternoons. 5) I am concerned that I will lose my organic certification for my dates because the water vapor will have chlorine. And now that I am thinking about it, dates thrive in the desert because it is dry. So the constant water vapor could cause my dates to mold. I will likely lose my business. 6) I have had up to two inches of sand at the bottom of my pool after a big wind storm. I am in a wind tunnel and so is the wave. I saw the information on Chad Maye’s bill. I can tell you cleaning sand and debris from a pool that is 13 football fields will be impossible. 7) If you go to the site, you will see that right along 60th is a high rise of land, about 20 feet above the desert floor. That is dirt from Trilogy that Shea got permission to dump there. It is mind boggling that they will dig away 1/2 mile long, 400 feet wide and at least 10 feet deep of our precious desert floor. And Mr. Simon said that the sand will stay on site. Where will they pile all that sand? 8) I am wondering if they are going to replace my fence on the west side of my property? What will they do with my chain link fence and the bushes I have there? I have a CVWD access gate on the west side also. It allows CVWD employees to open the water gates to allow the Canal water to flow. I use this water to irrigate my dates trees. 9) I keep looking at what they say is “back of house” which is all that area behind the wave pool going to 60th. Where are they going to put all the employee parking, the chlorine storage, the maintenance storage, back of pool structures, event parking, etc.? Since there must be a wall and a gated entrance on 60th because of safety issues, keeping kids from sneaking on the property, these cars will be lining up outside my house by 6:15AM if they need to have wave pool operators, life guards, employees at the rental stores, etc. all there before 7AM for a 7AM start. If you look at the June 7 agenda, pages 791 to 794, the map shows you PA III G, back of house. You can see the odd shape of the south end of the property since there are multiple owners and the different uses of the land. Then if you go to page 794, you can see what they are cramming into this area. My favorite line is “parking is 32 4 estimated at about 18 spaces based on existing operations at the Lemoore Surf Ranch, a comparable wave basin”. Lemoore has 18 Airstreams on the property to house visiting surfers. It is not a resort. Eighteen parking spaces is ridiculously low considering you will have people running the equipment, people in the towers, jet ski drivers, lifeguards, hotel employees, commercial employees, etc. etc. Even if it is just for the wave area, it is not adequate enough. Plus, buses for special events will be idling on 60th. For safety and security, this can’t be an open area. It has to be gated. 10) I hear all day long the “beep, beep, beep” of the construction trucks working at Cantera. So that noise will be louder and even more constant for up to a 23 years buildout and continuous during the phased developments ? 11) The constant sand coming from the construction site will be in my pool, in my air conditioning system, my swamp cooler, and my house all the time. I am worried about my health. 12) The 18 million gallons of water weighs 150 million pounds. They can’t convince me that 150 million pounds of water moving back and forth all day long won’t cause ground movement and vibrations that can affect my pool and home foundation. It may potentially impact the ground beneath the wave basin to shift and cause a lot of problems. 13) Mr. Simon tried to tell me that the water will absorb the light. I know that with the sand and the water vapor particles, the light from the 80 foot towers will just reflect and cause a massive swath of light (again, 1/2 mile long and 400 foot wide). Again, light which was shielded during the light demonstration will be visible throughout the adjacent community as they clear cut the property. 14) Evaporation is a huge problem. CVWD has no experience modeling water evaporation from 6 foot waves and with our wind and our heat. I heard a presentation that said CVWD treats it like a moving lake. I am sorry for this long rambling list. But I just don’t understand how this project can be approved with so many issues that not only affect me but all the communities surrounding it. Additionally, the 600 STVRs times 6 - 8 people each STVR, times two to three cars is a very real concern. This project will change the character of this whole area and Coral Mountain in particular, forever. Please consider the points that I’ve raised above and I really hope you will be able to arrange the meeting that I am requesting. Thanks very much again for your consideration. Sincerely, Lisa Castro 33 5 La Quinta, CA 34 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Sunday, June 19, 2022 1:52 PM To:Rick Roth; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro Cc:Tania Flores Subject:Re: I am requesting the financial pro forma and financial viability evidence for the proposed Wave Park Mr. Roth, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Council when they hear the matter again at hearing. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Rick Roth Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 1:42 PM To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Re: I am requesting the financial pro forma and financial viability evidence for the proposed Wave Park EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Ms. Criste and City Council members: I’ve been informed that: (1) the city has obtained NO financial pro forma nor evidence of financial viability for the proposed wave park; (2) unprecedented negative financial changes have occurred over the past 24 months and experts cannot forecast when things will improve; (3) whatever costs the developers might have originally imagined have increased dramatically; (4) forecasts for revenues based on luxury home sales, Canadian snow bird spending, and weekend road trips have declined significantly as mortgage rates increase, the Canadian dollar slips, and the price of gas exceeds $6/gal. As a result, the public can have NO confidence in the viability of the proposed development. In such a case, why would the City benefit from giving new entitlements to an owner/developer for an unjustified proposal? I therefore request that the City ask the staff to prepare a current pro forma covering costs, revenues, and build-out rates given current and anticipated factors (e.g., the Fed will raise rates another 0.75% next month) and address the project's financial viability. Please share these data before the July 5, as soon as possible. Thank you for helping us all get to a judicious decision regarding this enormous project, Sincerely, 35 2 Rick Roth , LQ On Jun 17, 2022, at 12:23 PM, Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> wrote: Mr. Roth, I believe you are asking for developer pro formas or construction cost estimates in your request below. The City does not request or require this type of information from developers of private sector projects. We do not, therefore, have the information you are requesting. Please let me know if there is anything else with which I can assist. Nicole Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Rick Roth Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 10:37 AM To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> Subject: I am requesting the financial pro forma and financial viability evidence for the proposed Wave Park ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Nicole, I assume there must be documents in the public record supplied by the developer for the proposed wave park. I’m assuming these were prepared many months ago, based on prevailing rates at that time. (1) Please furnish me electronically all data submitted by the developer in this regard so that I may analyze them before the July 5 City Council meeting. Please be sure to tell me the date when those data were provided to the city. I will require at least 10 days to do my analysis, so please provide them as soon as possible. (2) What, if any, adjustments have been made since those data were submitted to the city, and how have those data changes been reflected in the proposal and development agreement? (3) We can see that costs of all sorts have increased from 30% to more than 100% over the last two years. Has the city reassessed the financial aspects of the proposed project during that time, to adjust the plan for these rising costs? If so, please provide me the resulting updated documents. If not, how would the city council be expected to assess the proposed project? I appreciate your diligent work on behalf of the city and hope we can all reach a reasonable and prudent decision. 36 3 Thanks, Rick mobile 37 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Tuesday, June 21, 2022 7:30 AM To:Alena Callimanis Cc:Consulting Planner; Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Callimanis, Alena - Coral Mountain Special Assessment Good morning Ms. Callimanis, Thank you for your comments. As they have been provided to the City Council, the comments will also be included as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov -----Original Message----- From: Alena Callimanis Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 8:38 AM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Rosemary Hallick <rhallick@laquintaca.gov>; Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Ms. Hallick's review of Stone Creek La Quinta Assessment ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Mayor Evans, Council Members and Staff, I want to express my deep appreciation for the excellent sleuth work by Rosemary Hallick regarding the La Quinta Special Assessment in the Stone Creek Development brochures. I asked Ms. Hallick before the June 7th Council Meeting if she knew about the Assessment. She did not, but she called multiple people over many days at the Stone Creek offices and finally found someone who knew about the La Quinta assessment. It turns out it was a marketing error. The dollar amount was the total assessment above the 1% property tax that deals with mostly Riverside and a small number of La Quinta special assessments. Thanks to Ms. Hallick’s work, Stone Creek has submitted changes to the corporate office to have the wording corrected in their sales brochures. However, in my discussions with a developer at Cantera about special assessments, the developer told me that special assessments are built into sales prices all the time. So if you build just houses on the Coral Mountain site, without a surfing pool, the Development Agreement can easily include a provision for the price of the house to include the La Quinta portion of the 38 2 property tax multiplied by the number of years until 2033 and that portion can be given to the City. We all now realize that La Quinta can obtain revenue from new developments by negotiating a special assessment with the developer, and this means you can obtain reliable revenue from a low-risk residential development rather than proceeding with the high-risk surf park so many residents oppose. Respectfully, Alena Callimanis La Quinta Residents for Responsible Development La Quinta, CA 92253 39 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Tuesday, June 21, 2022 7:30 AM To:Alex Simmons Cc:Tania Flores; Consulting Planner; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Simmons, Alex - Coral Mountain Comments Good morning Mr. Simmons, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Alex Simmons Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 10:13 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov> Subject: EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. And we are still considering allowing Coral Mountain to use this water?????? 40 2 Alex 41 42 43 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Wednesday, June 22, 2022 1:22 PM To:Bert Inch; Linda Evans; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena; Steve Sanchez; Jon McMillen; Danny Castro Cc:Tania Flores Subject:Re: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Support Mr. Inch, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Council when they hear the matter on July 5. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Bert Inch Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 11:57 AM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Wave Project - Support EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. La Quinta City Council, I’d like to express my enthusiastic support for the Coral Mountain Wave project. As a frequent La Quinta visitor, I could not be more excited about this opportunity for unique and exciting recreation for my entire family. My wife and I spend a lot of time at La Quinta and it’s sometimes a struggle to convince our young adult children to join us. With the addition of Coral Mountain, I know for a fact they’d be begging me to fly them down there as often as I could. We live in Northern California and travel extensively, and really love the Thermal airport for visits to La Quintal. We have a choice of literally hundreds of wonderful golf and beach communities to visit, but there is nothing like what is being proposed in this project. I really hope it will be approved and come to fruition soon. Feel free to contact me with any questions, or to let me know any other way I can support the project. Best, Bert Bert Inch | CEO +1 408 640 9493 | TransPak.com | We Make It Happen 44 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Thursday, June 23, 2022 12:03 PM To:Kathy Weiss; Linda Evans; Danny Castro;; Robert Radi; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; John Pena Cc:Tania Flores Subject:Re: Lake Mead nears dead pool status as water levels hit another historic low Ms. Weiss, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council when they consider the matter at hearing. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Kathy Weiss Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 10:51 AM To: Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov>; Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Danny Castro <dcastro@laquintaca.gov>; dalekarent@aol.com <dalekarent@aol.com>; acallimanis@gmail.com <acallimanis@gmail.com>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Lake Mead nears dead pool status as water levels hit another historic low ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** FYI- for Wave public record City Hall. Kathy Weiss Subject: Lake Mead nears dead pool status as water levels hit another historic low https://news.yahoo.com/lake-mead-nears-dead-pool-193518416.html?soc src=social-sh&soc trk=ma Kathy Weiss Owner/Director Crystal Springs Ranch & Saddlery Carbondale, CO Crystal Springs West, Thermal, Ca. 45 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Monday, June 27, 2022 11:24 AM To: Cc:Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Consulting Planner; Monika Radeva Subject:Straubinger, Robert 2022-06-24 - Comments - Water Park Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Robert Straubinger Date: June 24, 2022 at 7:04:17 PM MST To: Council <Council@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Water Park EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. I recently read that your council is considering approval for a large water park in your near by desert land. Please consider NON APROVAL for this project. California does not have the water in its reservoirs nor in the aquifer for such a wasteful purpose. Whatever money this project may contribute to your coffers, it can’t possibly be justified to use precious water that is quickly draining away. I pray that you will not approve this project. Sincerely, Dr. Robert Straubinger Sent from Mail for Windows 46 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Saturday, June 25, 2022 10:48 AM To:John Allen Cc:Tania Flores; Consulting Planner; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Allen, John - Surf Park Comments Good morning Mr. Allen, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov -----Original Message----- From: John Allen Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 10:13 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Surf Park ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Due to the continued drought conditions in the State of California and the Coachella Valley, the Surf Park project must be declined. It’s simply not a good use of scarce resources. I live in La Quinta on Avenida Madero in The Cove. ͱͲͳʹ׼׽׾ John Allen Sent from my iPhone 47 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Saturday, June 25, 2022 8:01 PM To:John Perry Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Perry, John: Letter to City Council Regarding Coral Mountain Resort Attachments:CM Letter to City Council.pdf Good afternoon Mr. Perry, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: John Perry Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 11:24 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Letter to City Council Regarding Coral Mountain Resort EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Please accept this letter regarding the project that is the subject of the July 5 City Council Meeting. -- John S. Perry La Quinta, CA 48 John S. Perry La Quinta, CA 92253 June 25, 2022 TO: Mayor Linda Evans & Members of the La Quinta City Council RE: Coral Mountain Resort We’ve been homeowners since 2007 and full-time residents in Trilogy at La Quinta for the past five years. We support the proposed Coral Mountain Resort on Madison between Avenues 58 and 60. We’ve followed this project since it was announced more than two years ago. In that time, we’ve read the analysis from city staff, and both the dra and final environmental reviews. We’ve attended forums on the project, walked the property, and listened carefully to the objections raised by opponents. We encourage the City Council to approve the project. Our reasoning – in summary – follows. THE DEVELOPER Meriwether Companies has a well-earned reputation for building quality developments in Southern California and other regions. Their proposed Coral Mountain Resort is a high-end residential and commercial project which, according to local Realtors we have spoken with, will increase property values at this end of the city. The resort is unlike the other half-baked projects that litter the corner of Madison and Avenue 60 – projects that are unbuilt or partially built and detract from Trilogy and Andalusia. THE PROJECT We welcome this project’s plan to bring neighborhood-level retail and stores to the corner of Madison & Avenue 58th – something that has been promised for years. The proposed hotel and surf basin, like SilverRock / Talus, fits in with the city’s vision to be a destination for more than golfers. The project is gated. The hotel, restaurant and surf basin are located within the interior of the property, surrounded by low-density residential, 49 perimeter walls and landscaping, consistent with the surrounding communities. The perimeter walls will be set back along Madison Street and Avenue 58 “in excess of the city’s existing requirements, to further reduce impacts on views of Coral Mountain and the Santa Rosa Mountains,” according to city staff. THE PROCESS The developer has complied fully with state CEQA requirements. City staff has issued a mitigated negative declaration for the project and has recommended its approval. The Planning Commission voted to approve the project aer holding extensive public hearings, hearing from residents pro and con as well as the developer. OPPOSITION Opponents of the project have been organized and vocal. However, most of the criticism falls into two categories: Either the opponent a) doesn’t accept the findings of staff or the final environmental review or b) they want the city to deny the application based on universal concerns, such as climate change, drought and open space preservation. In both cases, they are asking city officials to disregard the science and procedures prescribed by state and city regulations. Or they want city officials to take on an activist function outside the role of La Quinta government. Other opponents have used social media and the press to promote erroneous information about the project. Some have even questioned the professionalism and honesty of city staff and elected officials. WATER Much attention has been placed on water supply. While we all are aware of drought conditions in the West, the final EIR confirms that Coachella Valley Water District has “correctly calculated for, and demonstrated that it can supply the water demand generated by the proposed project, as well as all other existing and projected future demands.” Again, opponents of the project question the accuracy of the data as well as the honesty of CVWD. If the facts about the water supply were otherwise, La Quinta and other valley cities should look to restrict all future development, not this one project. To reject Coral Mountain Resort on the basis of unsubstantiated 50 fears about water supply would penalize a developer who has successfully followed the process required by state and local regulations. LIGHTS The final EIR concludes that “operation of the Wave Basin will not have any significant light and glare impacts because the lighting is oriented directly onto the Wave Basin, complies with all Municipal Code requirements for lighting, and avoids spillage of light or glare outside of the planning Area.” NOISE While the project will generate short-term construction noise and long-term noise from increased traffic and operations – including from the Wave Basin – these increases are not significant under current city noise standards, according to the final EIR. CONCLUSION The property on Madison between Avenues 58 and 60 won’t remain vacant forever. It is zoned to be developed – for residential, commercial and recreational purposes. It will be developed at some point. The question before the City Council is really what that development will be, who the developer will be, and how well the development adheres to city and state standards. Coral Mountain Resort – with the proper mitigation and conditions – will be a quality development for this property. We encourage the City Council to approve the project. Thank you. John & Diane Perry La Quinta, CA 92253 51 1 From:Cheri Flores Sent:Monday, June 27, 2022 8:38 AM To:Tania Flores Cc:Consulting Planner Subject:FW: I OPPOSE CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT Cheri Flores | Planning Manager Design & Development Department City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. (760)777-7067 CLFlores@LaQuintaCA.gov www.LaQuintaCA.gov From: hirohata Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 3:43 PM To: Cheri Flores <clflores@laquintaca.gov> Subject: I OPPOSE CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Dear Ms. Flores, Please see Yahoo News article that voices the opinion that we in La Quinta feel. https://www.yahoo.com/news/given-water-crisis-la-quinta-120507086.html Given Our water crisis, La Quinta surf park should have been laughed out the door. Please cancel this project for the good of our city and state. Joyce Gonzales - , La Quinta CA 92253 m V 52 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Sunday, June 26, 2022 12:21 PM To:Cher Van Wagenen Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Van Wagenen, Jeff & Cher: Newsom’s Statement re Water Conservation Good afternoon, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Cher Van Wagenen Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 8:36 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Fwd: Newsom’s Statement re Water Conservation EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Subject: Re: Newsom’s Statement re Water Conservation John Thank you for your response to my email regarding Gov. Newsom’s plea to reduce water usage to a 15% reduction. As you should know, within the week, Gov. Newsom is prepared to mandate conservation to far more stringent requirements to all California residents and businesses. Since Coral Mountain Wave Project uses potable water, using 80 million gallons to fill the lagoon, but has not included the 2022 stats of evaporation, the project is obscene to consider in this multi year drought. Additionally, when East Coachella Valley residents (Oasis, Thermal, North Shore, etc.) have arsenic tainted ground water, using potable water for “the largest Wave/Surf Project” in the world is unconscionable. I see few reports on the electrical draw of the Coral Mountain project. Logistically, with the light standards and electrical energy to generate the waves it must consume enormous electricity.. Over the last years, the Coachella Valley has suffered repeated brown outs and complete electrical outages. Coral Mountain Wave Project will drain our already taxed electric grid. 53 2 I beg you to reconsider this project, do not fall prey to the big moneyed developers, who’s only interest is a landslide dollar return at the detriment of the future of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley at large. The Aquifer reserve may not survive years of the Coral Mountain water waste. Most emphatically, Jeff Van Wagenen Cher Van Wagenen , La Quinta, CA 92253 On May 25, 2022, at 1:17 PM, John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov> wrote: Thank you for taking the time to express your views on the Coral Mountain project. Although council members cannot pre-determine how we will vote on a project, I can assure you that as a lifelong desert resident I take very seriously the effects of any project that comes before the city council, it's impact on our natural resources, the environment, traffic, and benefits to the community. As with all items that come before the council, I will consider all the information presented by all interested parties for this project. Also, for future reference, please feel free to send or copy the City Clerk’s Office so that your communications can conveniently be included as part of the record for correspondence received in connection with this project, which can be sent to: CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov. Thank you again for reaching out to share your concerns. John Peña | Member of the City Council City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760.777.7030 www.laquintaca.gov www.playinlaquinta.com 54 3 From: Cher Van Wagenen Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:38 AM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Newsom’s Statement re Water Conservation EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Gov. Gavin Newsom renewed his calls for strict water conservation measures across California in a meeting on Monday, May 23, with the state’s largest urban water suppliers — warning that if local efforts don’t save enough water, the state will have to enact mandatory restrictions. “Every water agency across the state needs to take more aggressive actions to communicate about the drought emergency and implement conservation measures,” Newsom said. “Californians made significant changes since the last drought but we have seen an uptick in water use, especially as we enter the summer months. We all have to be more thoughtful about how to make every drop count.” Newsom will meet with the agencies again in two months to get an update on conservation efforts. He also asked them to submit water use data more frequently and increase transparency so the state can more accurately measure whether it is meeting its conservation goals. The State Water Resources Control Board is scheduled to vote Tuesday on a statewide ban on watering non-functional turf at commercial, industrial and 55 4 institutional locations. The board will also consider requiring local agencies to implement water use restrictions. Local water agency restrictions currently only cover about half of California’s population. The city of Los Angeles will enact two-day outdoor watering restrictions starting on June 1, down from the current three, with watering permitted at odd- numbered street addresses on Mondays and Fridays, and at even-numbered addresses on Thursdays and Sundays. On Friday, Mayor Eric Garcetti met with California Natural Resources Agency Secretary Wade Crowfoot to highlight the need to protect the region’s trees, even with water restrictions, amid the historic drought. Trees can capture stormwater, improve water quality and reduce flood risk, along with helping air quality and the impacts of heat waves. Once the watering restrictions take effect in Los Angeles, outdoor watering with sprinklers will be limited to eight minutes per station. Sprinklers with water- conserving nozzles will be limited to 15 minutes per station. All watering will have to be done in the evening or early morning, with no watering permitted outdoors between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. The two-day watering restrictions will be enforced by the Conservation Response Unit, which will focus on areas that are using the most water, according to DWP General Manager and Chief Engineer Marty Adams. He said when the restrictions were announced that the department will re-assign employees to ensure coverage in all areas of the city, and might bring on additional personnel during the summer. RELATED ARTICLES •Riverside County fire officials ban outdoor burning amid megadrought, early wildfire season •Gov. Newsom visits Carson to discuss drought response, including proposed wastewater plant •California drought: March water usage the worst so far, up 19% •What rainy season? Southern California sees little relief on drought •America’s love affair with the lawn is getting messy Garcetti also said the water restrictions’ enforcement will begin with education for people who are violating the ordinance, but it will escalate with fines and tickets if needed. The city’s policy is less strict than some parts of L.A. County, which will be limited to one-day per week watering. According to Newsom’s office, banning watering of decorative lawns would save between 156,000 acre-feet and 260,000 acre-feet per year, the equivalent of water used by 780,000 households in a year. The governor’s office also urged people to shower for only five minutes or less, stop taking baths, only wash full loads of clothes and use a broom instead of a hose to clean outdoor areas. 56 5 •Newsroom Guidelines •News Tips •Contact Us •Report an Error Cher Van Wagenen 57 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Monday, June 27, 2022 2:13 PM To:Kathy Weiss Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Weiss, Kathy: FYI- Water per John Oliver Please share Good afternoon, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Kathy Weiss Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 2:10 PM Subject: FYI- Water per John Oliver Please share EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. https://youtu.be/jtxew5XUVbQ TONIGHT WITH JOHN OLIVER! Kathy D. Weiss Summer Residence Carbondale, CO 81623 Winter Residence: La Quinta, CA 92253 58 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Wednesday, June 29, 2022 7:19 AM To:jburgie@mac.com Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Burgeson, John: Wave Project Opposed Attachments:Comment - Burgeson - Opposed.pdf Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Teresa Thompson <Tthompson@laquintaca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 11:17 AM To: Teresa Thompson <Tthompson@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov> Subject: COMMENT: Wave Project Opposed - Burgeson Madam Mayor and Councilmembers, For your information/review, please see the attached comment letter from an interested person in Connecticut. Teresa Teresa Thompson | Management Specialist City Manager's Office City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760.777.7030 www.laquintaca.gov www.laquintaca.gov/covid19 www.playinlaquinta.com As always you can find a full list of resources and information by visiting www.laquintaca.gov 59 60 61 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Wednesday, June 29, 2022 10:46 AM To:cathy Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Laurie McGinley; Monika Radeva Subject:Giles, Catherine: Written comments for July 5th Coral Mountain meeting Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov -----Original Message----- From: cathy Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 9:46 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Written comments for July 5th Coral Mountain meeting ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear City Council Members, My name is Catherine Giles and I am an owner in Andalusia community adjacent to the proposed Coral Mountain wave park. I’m opposed to the wave park idea for this property. The noise and light pollution and the irresponsibly high water evaporation rates mean this project is not in the best interest of La Quinta. I hope you will consider the feelings of the majority of us and please vote this down when the time comes. Sincerely, Catherine Giles La Quinta CA 92253 62 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Wednesday, June 29, 2022 7:05 AM To:Sylvia Lasser Cc:Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Lasser, Sylvia: Opposition to the Coral Mountain Wave Park Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Sylvia Lasser Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 12:17 AM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov>; City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Opposition to the Coral Mountain Wave Park EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. Hello City of La Quinta Leaders, I don’t know if you have been keeping up with the news this week, but over the last 10 days La Quinta has appeared in the National news three times. All articles have panned La Quinta City officials for letting the “absurd” idea of a Wave Park in the desert get as far as it has. I am sure other La Quinta citizens have sent you the articles. Below is another La Quinta letter that made it to Yahoo national news just today. You must reject the Coral Mountain Wave Park project. Thank you, Sylvia Lasser La Quinta Please see article below: 63 2 If officials OK surf park, no one is going to conserve water I find it interesting that households have to watch how much water they are using for washing clothes, watering lawns, washing cars, etc. You tell golf courses how much water they can use, but one of the largest wave basins in the world is acceptable? If officials approve this, the backlash will result in everyone using as much water as we care to. Don't bother sending notices on conservation; they will be ignored. We have to conserve water, but not a ridiculous wave park that will probably go bankrupt? Who is going to come to the desert and use it? Senior citizens don’t go to wave parks. Makes me wonder how this got this far, whose interests are being served and who's benefiting. Certainly not the surrounding communities. Every day, we hear about water conservation, restrictions. Anyone who thinks we can drain the aquifer and survive is grossly misinformed. What if our droughts get worse? Has no one noticed how much hotter the desert is getting, not to mention the increase in fires in our area. We are already in a severe drought. We need to protect our water supply, at all costs, and forgo our financial gains. Christine Mazza, La Quinta This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Sharing Mississippi water with California would help feed America Sent from Mail for Windows 64 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Wednesday, June 29, 2022 8:11 AM To:Consulting Planner Cc:Tania Flores; Cheri Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Levy, Brian - Radi Response: Coral Mountain Surf Resort Please add to the project file. Thank you. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 8:00 AM To: Brian Levy Cc: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov>; Jon McMillen <jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Re: Coral Mountain Surf Resort Dear Mr. Levy, Thank you for your email and the links you have provided. To reciprocate, I am sharing this website: https://www.climate.gov/ as it is maintained under the auspices of NOAA. Specifically, I have been following the monthly ENSO updates by Dr. Emily Backer. Yes, I did watch John Oliver’s report and did find the “magic water” allocation of interest. Have a wonderful 4th of July weekend. Kind Regards, Robert ____________________ Robert Radi, Ph.D., MBA Council Member City of La Quinta Direct 65 66 3 By the way, I hope that you have taken the time to view John Oliver’s report on the Colorado River. It was the best report I have heard (though a bit irreverent) on why the Colorado River is in the condition it is in right now. Given that the Colorado River is how we replenish our underground aquifer, it is incredibly disconcerting to think of what will happen to our aquifer if our Colorado River water supply is cut off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtxew5XUVbQ Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Brian Levy La Quinta resident 67 68 POWER POINTS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JULY 5, 2022 July 5, 2022 1 Special City Council Meeting July 5, 2022 Pledge of Allegiance 1 2 July 5, 2022 2 Special City Council Meeting July 5, 2022 PH1 –CONTINUED Coral Mountain Resort Project 4 3 4 WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JULY 5, 2022 1 From:Brad Anderson <ba4612442@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 2:15 PM To:City Clerk Mail Subject:Public Comment - La Quinta City Council Special meeting - July 5, 2022 (4:PM) ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** July 5, 2022 City of La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber's 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA. 92253 Attn: Clerk of the Board/ Council/General Public Re: Public Comment (Coral Mountain Resort project) Dear La Quinta City Council, Please review my written statements listed below prior to deciding the radical change of property Zoning and moving forward with actions of negatively impacting long established City of La Quinta neighborhood's with the proposed Coral Mountain Resort project. The City's has chosen to cancel the July 5, 2022 regular City Council meeting and have decided to instead scheduled a "Special" City Council meeting for the same date and time. Of course with that type of logic ‐ City officials eliminate members of the Public from attending remotely (AB361) at the July 5, 2022 continued Public Hearing from June 7, 2022. That intentional action of limiting public discord was decided at the Citys regular Council meeting of June 21, 2022. The City of La Quinta Council placed potential unlawful requirements on the State of California Emergency AB361 during their June 21, 2022 City Council meeting. The City's actions to dictate unjustified requirements attached to California's AB361 illustrates the lawlessness of local politicians in regards to the implementation of AB361 and how to abuse the good intentions of that State of Emergency AB361 law for less than ethical reasons. Please choose to void (cancel) the July 5, 2022 City Council "Special" meeting and reschedule to another date where both In‐person and remote Public participation would be identified and assepted As was the June 7, 2022 City Council Public Hearing. Sincerely, Brad Anderson | 37043 Ferber Dr Rancho Mirage, CA Ba4612442@gmail.com Cc: 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Sunday, July 3, 2022 2:58 PM To:penny@bomgtwrks.com Cc:Consulting Planner; Monika Radeva; Laurie McGinley; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores Subject:Boehm, Penny: Continuance of Coral Mountain Wave Project Good afternoon, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: penny@bomgtwrks.com <penny@bomgtwrks.com> Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2022 12:14 PM To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>; Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>; jpena@laquntaca.gov; Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Cc: Monika Radeva <mradeva@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Re: Continuance of Coral Mountain Wave Project ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Sorry for not identifying myself: Penny Boehm 61285 Topaz Drive La Quinta, CA 92253 From: penny@bomgtwrks.com penny@bomgtwrks.com Date: Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 12:10 PM To: levans@laquintaca.gov <levans@laquintaca.gov>, kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>, rradi@laquintaca.gov <rradi@laquintaca.gov>, jpena@laquntaca.gov <jpena@laquntaca.gov>, ssanchez@laquintaca.gov <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Cc: mradeva@laquintaca.gov <mradeva@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Continuance of Coral Mountain Wave Project First, Happy Independence Day! Respectfully requesting your approval of the applicant’s request for a continuance of their item scheduled for Tuesday, July 5th at 4:00 pm. Further, that there be no public comment at that time. It would, in my opinion, be more of the same comments and information we have heard from the public. 2 It is important that all past and recent questions be fully answered by the applicant, and to do this to the satisfaction of your Council and the public, I suggest more time is appropriate. Thank you for your diligence and your continued effort to do the best for our City! 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 11:48 AM To:Wendy Clarke Cc:Consulting Planner; Laurie McGinley; Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Monika Radeva Subject:Clarke, Wendy: Written Comments, City Council Special Meeting, July 5, 2022 Attachments:City Council July 5 Written Comments.docx Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Wendy Clarke <clarkewendy1@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2022 9:33 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Written Comments, City Council Special Meeting, July 5, 2022 ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Good morning Ms. Radeva, Hope you enjoyed the holiday weekend and as always, that you for your service to our community. Attached are my written comments for the City Council Special Meeting today: Agenda Item #1, Public Hearing Coral Mountain Resort project. I appreciate your help to include these alternative development suggestions and project concerns. Sincerely, Wendy Clarke 81566 Ulrich Dr. La Quinta 760-777-0812 (mobile) To: Mayor Evans, Mayor Pro Tem Fitzpatrick and City Council Members Pena, Radi, and Sanchez Cc: Monica Radeva, City Clerk From: Wendy Clarke, 81566 Ulrich Dr. La Quinta 760‐777‐0812 Re: Coral Mountain Resort Date: July 5th, 2022 Thank you for the energy you have invested to listen to your constituents, at times beyond midnight. There is resounding opposition to the Coral Mountain Development. I am asking that you partner with residents to find an alternative to the proposed development: explore revenue streams compatible with LQ resident’s quality of life and aligned with environmental interests. DEVELOPMENT & REVENUE CONCEPTS 1. Undeveloped annexed land: Consider tax assessment for new homes within the Thermal Redevelopment Project Area: Example: $2.5 M (assessed value) @ 1 % per year is $25,000 to the County. La Quinta receives 7% monies and fire service credits. The city could consider assessing new homes to cover losses until the long‐term debt is recovered. Include aligning school district tax $$ from CVUSD (Coachella) to DSUSD (Desert Sands/LQ) 2. Alternate fitness revenue for CM: Maintain Low Density zoning compatible with established neighborhoods. 1) Destination pickleball venue, ultimate dining experience with crafted cocktails, lessons with pros, pickleball sports store. Partner with existing regional/national tournaments for practice and play. 2) Hiking and Electric biking are significant attractions in the Coachella Valley. Coral Mountain is an extraordinary location for these activities, and it is a fantastic opportunity to support local businesses and LQ Pedigo Electric Bikes. 3. La Quinta Residents and Homeowners are not in favor of water intensive projects. The developer continues to compare CM water usage to a golf course. Using this to defend a surf wave is mind‐ boggling. Neither new development should not be considered suitable. Moreover, existing golf courses could be held accountable for turf reduction and reclaimed water use. Fines could be imposed, if not compliant. Potential city revenue? 4. Coral Mountain residential build: STVR/ TOT: The Developer has a vague, 20+ year build‐out for the 496 homes starting @ $2.5M. This phase is where the city realizes the majority of TOT. By the time these homes are built, sold, and rented, if at all, the established Thermal annexed properties will generate property tax revenue. CONCERNS AND OPPOSTION  Surf Wave Location: The surf wave is not a good or compatible neighbor. In reviewing USA surf waves open/pending/closed, they are not located, or rezoned to disrupt the lives of 1,000s of long‐standing residents. The proposed venue is located adjacent to 15 well‐established neighborhoods and private residence with limited access on the South, West, and North boundaries: Andalusia, Trilogy, The Quarry, Santerra, PGA West & Legends, Puerta Azul, Lions Gate, Santa Rosa Trails, Coral Mountain at Alta Verde, Palo Verde, Stone Creek Ranch, and 3 private residences.  Land Purchase/Zoning: In May 2019, Meriwether purchased 400 acres @ $29M zoned for a low‐ density residential/golf course community. Who would risk this investment without reassurance that a zoning change would be granted?  Kelly Slater: Environmentalist? Beyond Lemoore, located near dairy farms, KSW’s other investments have failed: Austin (permanently closed), Queensland/Coolum (debacle with developer and government), Japan (devastating blow pre‐Olympics). Environmentally conscious doesn’t come to mind considering the state’s worst drought in history.  KESQ News “Desert Water,” June 16. The was bold coverage focused on the abundance of water in our Valley. It stated that our aquifer is not reliant on the Sierra Nevada snowpack. It comes from the Colorado River. We have senior water rights to this resource. It talked about CVWD, and the positive level post the last drought. What they didn’t say is that residents and businesses were asked to cut back during that time, contributing the level increase. A specific example was reported referencing residents questioning water demands of new developments, specifically local surf parks and luxury communities. The LQ City council meeting photo with Mr. Gamlin sitting front and center and a Meriwether, Coral Mountain illustration were shown to viewers. This was patronizing and residents question the association of the developer, Coachella Valley Water Resource Conservation District, CVWD and the media, all appearing aligned in support of Coral Mountain. In closing it said our water could not be shifted elsewhere in the State. There is an air of arrogance to think that the State Water Resources Control Board could not take bold action to amend what they believe is an antiquated water rights system.  Investor: Wave Pool Magazine speaks to Mr. Schwab’s love of race cars and surfing. Noteworthy that he is financially supporting a surf wave in La Quinta, 6 miles from the Thermal Racetrack (owners invested in CM).  Property Tax/Thermal Redevelopment Project Area: Trilogy, Andalusia, Griffin Ranch, portions of PGA West and other smaller developments were annexed to LQ and are exempt from annual property County tax $$ to repay the bond. In 2014 and 2016, the city met with John Benoit, County Supervisor, to negotiate a monetary compromise. Yes, residents who purchased in these areas use city services. The original negotiation agreement and current situation is a result of a city and county decision, not the homeowners who contribute to the community interests, pay sales tax, and voted for an increase in 2016 that generated $22M in 3 years. 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 11:18 AM To:seabird500@aol.com Cc:Laurie McGinley; Monika Radeva; Consulting Planner; Cheri Flores; Tania Flores Subject:DeCausemaker, Judy & Russell: La Quinta Wave Pool Project Good morning, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: seabird500@aol.com <seabird500@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2022 10:41 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: La Quinta Wave Pool Project ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** To City Council: I will not be able to attend the City Council meeting but would like to add my comments to the meeting. We don't want a Wave Pool in our community. My husband and I moved to La Quinta from the San Francisco Bay to retire and move away from all the development that is taking place there. Since we moved here we have seen little by little how this city is trying to over build things and make this an overblown tourist attraction. If you want to have more people come here and have more traffic that's what this will do. Most people will not come here in the summer months to vacation in a hot desert area anyway. The short winter season is not worth the trouble this will cause. I see the congestion in the Palm Desert area and I don't want to see this nice small town of La Quinta turn into that. We live in the Trilogy complex and the development is getting too close to us. We may have to think about moving again to escape being trapped into a overpopulated, overdeveloped mess. Please consider what the outcome of this decision means to the people who want to live in a nice retirement community and be comfortable with our surroundings. Judy & Russell DeCausemaker 81919 Prism Dr. La Quinta, CA. 92253 (442)300-2675 email: Seabird500@aol.com 1 From:Monika Radeva Sent:Monday, July 4, 2022 11:59 AM To:Lovrien, Christopher Cc:Laurie McGinley; Monika Radeva; Consulting Planner; Tania Flores; Cheri Flores Subject:Lovrien, Christopher: Coral Mountain Support Good afternoon, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the City Council as part of the public record for the project. The Council will consider the project at a continued public hearing on July 5, 2022. Monika Radeva, CMC | City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 Tel: (760) 777-7035 MRadeva@laquintaca.gov From: Lovrien, Christopher <cjlovrien@jonesday.com> Sent: Monday, July 4, 2022 11:57 AM To: City Clerk Mail <CityClerkMail@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Support ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Council Members: As a La Quinta homeowner (48785 Via Linda) who splits his time between La Quinta and Santa Monica, I write in support of the Coral Mountain project and to urge the Council to approve the project. Coral Mountain is likely to expand and diversify the offerings that bring visitors and new residents to our city. That means additional revenues and opportunities for the city and our many local businesses. Every project garners some opposition, and NIMBY‐ism is a typical part of the process. But it appears to me that the project owners, and the city itself, have been thoughtful about this development. As much as some opponents might wish to freeze time, thoughtful development is vital to having a vital city. I support the project and urge the city to do the same. Thank you for your consideration of my views. Christopher Lovrien ***This e‐mail (including any attachments) may contain information that is private, confidential, or protected by attorney‐client or other privilege. If you received this e‐mail in error, please delete it from your system without copying it and notify sender by reply e‐mail, so that our records can be corrected.*** 1 From:Teresa Thompson Sent:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 10:17 AM To:Teresa Thompson Cc:Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva Subject:COMMENT: Coral Mountain Resort - NADLER Dear Shay Nadler, Thank you for your email to the Members of the La Quinta City Council. Your email has been forwarded to me as City Manager. Please be advised that California law and the La Quinta Municipal Code set forth processes under which land use applications are governed. Generally speaking, these processes extend from U.S. and State constitutional provisions that entitle persons and property owners to due process of law and use of real property, subject to the valid exercise of the City’s police powers governing land use and its regulatory review. The land use applications for the Coral Mountain project, like any other land use applications, are entitled to the review processes. Moreover, the proponents of these land use applications are subject to the regulatory review process as would be other similarly- situated projects. The regulatory review process includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the review processes and requirements set forth in the State Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65000 et seq.), the State Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code, § 66410 et seq.), the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, §21000 et seq.), and the applicable provisions set forth in State Regulations and Title 9 [Zoning] and Title 13 [Subdivision Regulations] of the La Quinta Municipal Code (among other provisions). Because the law entitles all interested persons, including property owners and members of the public, to participate in the land use review processes, the City of La Quinta and its Council are committed to ensuring these processes are followed and respected. Your email and comments are appreciated. They will be added to the record of communications received for consideration by the City Council. As explained above, the land use processes must be followed, which means that the Coral Mountain project applications were first reviewed by the City’s Planning Commission for a recommendation that was provided to the City Council. A duly noticed public hearing was held on June 7, 2022 for Council’s consideration of the project which was continued to July 5, 2022 for a Special City Council meeting. I hope this is helpful. Thank you for reaching out to the Council and providing your comments. Sincerely, 2 Jon McMillen | City Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760.777.7030 jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov www.laquintaca.gov Begin forwarded message: From: Shay Nadler <shaynadler@yahoo.com> Date: July 4, 2022 at 6:49:24 PM PDT To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>, Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>, John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>, Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Say NO to the Wave Park ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Council members and Madam Mayor, I have been a full time voting resident of La Quinta for almost 4 years. I am extremely disappointed this development with a water wasting wave park is even on the agenda. Our State and in fact the entire country needs to protect and conserve water. I am totally against the developments Theme Park water waisting debacle and you will continue to hear this statement from me. Don’t let this get approved. Voters remember who voted for this and I will keep track and report to my neighbors. Shay Nadler 54120 Avenida Ramirez La Quinta, CA 92253 Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Teresa Thompson Sent:Tuesday, July 5, 2022 2:51 PM To:Teresa Thompson Cc:Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva Subject:COMMENT: Coral Mountain Surf - VARELA Dear Celeste Varela, Thank you for your email to the Members of the La Quinta City Council. Your email has been forwarded to me as City Manager. Please be advised that California law and the La Quinta Municipal Code set forth processes under which land use applications are governed. Generally speaking, these processes extend from U.S. and State constitutional provisions that entitle persons and property owners to due process of law and use of real property, subject to the valid exercise of the City’s police powers governing land use and its regulatory review. The land use applications for the Coral Mountain project, like any other land use applications, are entitled to the review processes. Moreover, the proponents of these land use applications are subject to the regulatory review process as would be other similarly- situated projects. The regulatory review process includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the review processes and requirements set forth in the State Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65000 et seq.), the State Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code, § 66410 et seq.), the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, §21000 et seq.), and the applicable provisions set forth in State Regulations and Title 9 [Zoning] and Title 13 [Subdivision Regulations] of the La Quinta Municipal Code (among other provisions). Because the law entitles all interested persons, including property owners and members of the public, to participate in the land use review processes, the City of La Quinta and its Council are committed to ensuring these processes are followed and respected. Your email and comments are appreciated. They will be added to the record of communications received for consideration by the City Council. As explained above, the land use processes must be followed, which means that the Coral Mountain project applications were first reviewed by the City’s Planning Commission for a recommendation that was provided to the City Council. A duly noticed public hearing was held on June 7, 2022 for Council’s consideration of the project which was continued to today, July 5, 2022 for a Special City Council meeting. I hope this is helpful. Thank you for reaching out to the Council and providing your comments. Sincerely, 2 Jon McMillen | City Manager City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico ◦ La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. 760.777.7030 jmcmillen@laquintaca.gov www.laquintaca.gov Begin forwarded message: From: Celeste Varela <manniesmama@icloud.com> Date: July 5, 2022 at 11:11:40 AM PDT To: Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>, Robert Radi <Rradi@laquintaca.gov>, Kathleen Fitzpatrick <kfitzpatrick@laquintaca.gov>, John Pena <jpena@laquintaca.gov>, Steve Sanchez <ssanchez@laquintaca.gov> Subject: Coral Mountain Surf ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Hello, I am writing to confirm my signature on the petition to VETO this project. HOW in the right mind of our City Council leaders can you even think this is a sustainable or wise project to tackle at this time. We are in the WORST drought in the history of the state. We NEED to keep the water for our communities and the golf courses that sustain them and keep our communities thriving. Why put a water park in the desert? ALL the light pollution to our beautiful desert sky’s. The added traffic to our small town, we already have the entire Montage‐Pendry project coming in 2023. It sounds to me as greed is the motivating factor in this bc there is NO way the Council can say this is to better or enhance our community. I am vehemently against it. Thank you, Celeste Varela Sent from my iPhone Celeste Varela CalBRE# 01350384 Bennion Deville Homes Indian Wells, CA 92210 Cell: (760) 408‐7116 Office: (760) 773‐3958 CelesteVarela@AOL.com 1 From:Consulting Planner Sent:Thursday, June 30, 2022 2:54 PM To:Kathy Weiss; acallimanis; derekwong745 Wong; Anast Demitt; Ramon Andalusia; Harvey Reed; Sheila Warren; sherry. barkas; Linda Evans Cc:Monika Radeva Subject:Re: From The New Yorker: The Water Wars Come to the Suburbs Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Ms. Weiss, Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Council when they consider the application on July 5, 2022. Nicole Sauviat Criste Consulting Planner City of La Quinta From: Kathy Weiss <kathy@crystalspringsranch.co> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 2:36 PM To: acallimanis <acallimanis@gmail.com>; derekwong745 Wong <derekwong745@yahoo.com>; Anast Demitt <anast.demitt@protonmail.com>; Ramon Andalusia <RFBAEZ7@Gmail.com>; Harvey Reed <hreed@dc.rr.com>; Sheila Warren <sheilawarren25@yahoo.com>; sherry. barkas <sherry.barkas@thedesertsun.com>; Linda Evans <Levans@laquintaca.gov>; Consulting Planner <ConsultingPlanner@laquintaca.gov> Subject: From The New Yorker: The Water Wars Come to the Suburbs ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** FYI The Water Wars Come to the Suburbs https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter‐from‐the‐southwest/the‐water‐wars‐come‐to‐the‐ suburbs?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_063022&utm_campaign=aud‐ dev&utm_medium=email&utm_term=tny_daily_digest&bxid=5be9ef5d3f92a404692c5846&cndid=42423808&hasha=8c eb1ecd81aa786984a1a17931598f03&hashb=a033b6344b7d28bc2df561811b826b0d1cf9a555&hashc=5fdbfd04a36e6fd 418de568e15c0c3d58de3a25452b3287cc35154c0532b1d5d&esrc=applenewsoverlay&mbid=CRMNYR062419 Get the writers you love, plus your favorite cartoons, on your phone or tablet. Download The New Yorker Today. https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple‐store/id1081530898?pt=45076&ct=App%20Share&mt=8 Kathy Weiss Owner/Director Crystal Springs Ranch & Saddlery Carbondale, CO 2 Crystal Springs West, Thermal, Ca. (970) 309‐7037 kathy@crystalspringsranch.co HAND OUTS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JULY 5, 2022 What can possibly change over the next 60 days Alena Callimanis La Quinta Residents for Responsible Development CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT What does the EIR say about noise FINDINGS The August 15, 2021, Surf Ranch noise measurements show that wave machine cable roller system improvements reduced the peak wave event noise levels from 75.7 to 73.5 dBA Leq. This represents a noise level reduction of approximately 2.2 dBA Leq. The updated noise level measurements suggest that the peak noise levels outlined in the March 17, 2021, Coral Mountain Specific Plan Noise Impact Analysis conservatively overstate the Project related wave machine by approximately 2.2 dBA Leq. Note: L4 is the location of the start up cable roller system and will be located close to Coral Mountain and close to Lisa Castro’s house CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Points to Consider •City Noise Ordinance says Daylight is 7AM to 10PM!!! •Wave is Every three minutes, 365 days per year •First study was only the wave, second included one jet ski and one announcement at beginning of wave •Where are the crowds, screaming, warning horns, music, multiple jet skis since wave is bi-directional, all echoing off Coral Mountain •As John Pena says we have echoing off our Santa Rosa Mountains •It was a software only test, no actual noise test done on site, there were only noise receptors CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Video CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Property Taxes to La Quinta at bond retirement before or by 2033 •Existing residences at PGA West Greg Norman, The Palms and Plaza Serena, Andalusia, Griffin Ranch, Trilogy, Santa Rosa Trail, Lion’s Gate, Santerra and Alta Verde. •Today’s total assessed value = $2,155,196,284 •Riverside County Property tax = 21,551,962.8 •6.5 cents to a dollar to La Quinta = $1.4 M •Does not consider all the new developments in the Thermal Redevelopment Area or new residences in these existing developments •Assessment Increases •Coral Mountain as Residences only, no golf course, with special assessments with the gorgeous location, dark skies, club house, community pool, pickle ball and tennis courts, quiet CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Development Agreement Timeline Per the Staff Report: With the revenue generated by Transient Occupancy Tax from the hotel and short-term vacation rentals on the site, the project is fiscally positive, generating a net revenue of up to $1.9 million annually at build out. As the project is to be built in phases, the actual costs and revenues are dependent on which portions of the project are constructed in any given year. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Colorado River Basin •You have received links to every article and you tube clip on this topic •Mr. Gamlin says if we don’t get another drop of Colorado River Water the aquifer is good for several hundred years •Mr. Gamlin, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 prohibits overdraft of the aquifer. You can’t take out more than you can replenish •I have given you the relevant CVWD pages regarding State Water Project allocations of 5% that CVWD ignored in their December report, and how they assumed they were still getting their maximum allocations of Colorado River Water •The development as proposed is 940,000 gallons per day or .5% of CVWD annual supply •Add in the STVRs and undercalculated evaporation due to high temperatures, wind and wave action, it is over 1 million gallons a day CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT The City Must Show the Initiative to Reduce Water Usage •No Golf Course is currently approved for Coral Mountain –just a developer fear tactic, which is ironic given Mr. Gamlin’s association with Silver Rock •Being in the current Zoning does not mean a golf course will be there if the Wave Basin is not approved •You must work with the Golf Courses to implement Links -Style irrigation –only irrigate greens and fairways CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Non-Mitigatable Green House Gases •From Council Member Radi’s recommended site, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Monday, May 23, 2022 •Greenhouse gas pollution caused by human activities trapped 49% more heat in the atmosphere in 2021 than they did in 1990, according to NOAA scientists. The biggest culprit: •Carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by far the most abundant human-emitted greenhouse gas. Roughly 36 billion metric tons of CO2 are emitted each year by transportation, electrical generation, cement manufacturing… CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Green House Gas Emissions CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT What causes Coral Mountain’s High GHG •The wave basin’s incredible size with over 17 acres of cement since it has to go down into a basin •The electrical requirements of the wave mechanism •Just look at special events or just normal weekends. With 4500 people,say 4 people per card,that is 1000 cars. •Mr. Gamlin said the project designs will save 850 car trips a year! CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Non-Mitigatable Aesthetics •Mr. Gamlin, stop saying people always complain about a development coming into an area that has no development •Stop comparing us to La Quinta Resort, PGA West or any other development •None will have 17 eighty foot lights •None will have a surfing resort, with waves running every three minutes, 365 days a year from 7AM to 10PM •None will have 600 short term vacation rentals and a 150 key hotel in the middle of established, quiet, residential neighborhoods CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT All of the items discussed are irrefutable •The only thing that might change is that the Feds will cut more water to CVWD •By the way, water can be removed out of our aquifer and sent to the Metropolitan Water District for Distribution to LA and other counties •Before approaching Palm Springs , the Whitewater River is fed imported water from the Colorado River Aqueduct, managed by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. •Today, MWD stores water from the Colorado River Aqueduct into the Indio Subbasin by Whitewater River for use as needed for MWD CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT What do YOU as City Officials hope to gain by waiting another 60 days •This is still the wrong project anywhere in desert CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - ALENA CALLIMANIS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Good afternoon Mayor Evans and Council members and others, I am Carol Strop, a CPA. Tonight I would like to speak to the developer’s request for postponement. Where has he been the last two plus years? Innumerable letters were sent to the planning commission and City Council and they are public record. The concerns should have been his responsibility to review from the start. Why give him more time now? Of course, running a City is business and development has benefits. The builder paid his fees and Mayor Evans was correct that they had an obligation to let him present his project. That is not a fiduciary responsibility but it was a commitment – to listen, not to agree. Now he has had his say and you have no further duty to him. The builder understands the risk of doing business. Trilogy at the Polo Fields, which has no Golf Course and no special amenities has waiting lists. Our opposition has been constructive. Look how much more we know than two years ago. In February 2020 the Wave sounded like a nice idea to me and no doubt to you, too. But had you known before the last meeting that a loud warning horn is sounded before every wave? That a wave is every three minutes? Really? Seems too many “small details” keep coming out. And to the proponents or Council members still in favor I ask - Do any of you live near Coral Mountain? No? Well then, no problem for you. A postponement would energize us further. Here is an example of the power of residents coming together. A well known Burbank developer, Gangi Development, proposed to shave off a hillside of a Glendale mountain to complete a controversial subdivision. Several homeowner associations enlisted the help of attorneys, the Santa Monica Conservancy, and the Sierra Club to try to overturn the City council’s affirmative vote for the project, and defeat it they did. The groups of opposition to the Wave are spreading. The developer certainly has other options. After all, he still has the property and perhaps Andalusia agreed to a compensatory price reduction amount should the rezoning fail. I would ask for that. Why else would the builder go forward? Mr. Gamlin, you have the opportunity to make Coral Mountain truly special. Forget the Wave, forget the golf course. Did you know that 80% of Americans cannot see the Milky Way and many see no stars at all? Here is a NASA picture of night lights in our Valley. The International Dark Sky Association has more than 190 cities, towns, parks, and preserves worldwide committed to limiting night time light. Why not a section of La Quinta? Our street lights at Trilogy are soft yellow and I can see the stars all the time. Why not use the Coral Mountain’s dark skies and gorgeous mountains as the selling point? Why not build beautiful homes with glass atriums, and trails with sky viewing areas? You do not need a postponement, you need to start over. So City Council, let’s hear your vote. Thank you. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - CAROL STROP PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Presentation script for Rick Roth’s July 5, 2022 presentation to the LQ City Council Good evening ladies and gentlemen. It’s my pleasure to present to you material prepared for your benefit by Rick Roth, a resident of La Quinta. Rick is a retired executive, professor and scientist who has overseen many multimillion dollar projects, including both successes and failures, some costing tens of billions of dollars. He cautions that proposed projects always look shiniest before predictable but nasty issues must be faced. He worries that our city is about to fall prey to the same type of terrible outcome, primarily because project proponents have not faced prudent financial scrutiny. Rick has analyzed the financial documents submitted by the developer and planning consultant. He has produced a detailed spreadsheet covering forecast revenues and costs the project would generate over the first 13 years. To do this, he adopted the developers’ proposed build- out plans and then generated revenues from occupancy, rental, and retail sales taxes. The developers’ plans become totally hazy beyond 13 years, and in any case those future dollars would make a negligible impact on the conclusions. Most importantly, Rick has included the probability of the proposed business failing. A failure and bankruptcy would shrink revenues and abrogate obligations. This would leave the City holding the bag for a half-mile long, nearly 17-acre abandoned concrete basin, becoming the greatest public nuisance in City history. The bottom line of his analysis is this: nobody would voluntarily choose to purchase or buy into the expected results of this project: a 91% likelihood of a bankruptcy within 13 years, with only a 9% chance of survival. Approving the project is financially equivalent to buying a lottery ticket offering a 9% chance of netting $6M cumulatively over 13 years but a 10X chance of a failure costing the city $600K over the same time frame. Rational humans are loss averse and would quickly reject such a gamble. His slides summarize the analysis, and the detailed electronic spreadsheet enables anyone to investigate further. The spreadsheet also shows a residential community developed under the existing zoning would have vastly lower risk and generate $2M in profit over the same time period. In light of this analysis, Rick believes approval of this project would be a breach of fiduciary duty. As he says, “No one can reasonably argue that economic advantages of this project justify its unmitigated environmental harms.” CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 7/6/2022 1 Proposed Wave Park is a Terrible Financial Bet for La Quinta Rick Roth La Quinta Resident Retired Executive & Professor How Much Would You Pay for this Lottery Ticket? If You Win: Get $6,000,000 Chance of Winning: 9% If You Lose: Pay $600,000 Chance of Losing:91% 1 2 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 7/6/2022 2 How Much Would You Pay for this Lottery Ticket? This Lottery Ticket is Equivalent to the Expected Results of the Proposed Wave Park (see spreadsheet for details) Expected Annual Profit (Loss) = -$286 Bottom Line: Nobody would voluntarily choose the Wave Park Project based on its financial prospects Fiduciary advisory: The project’s dismal financial prospects do not provide a credible justification for overriding unmitigated environmental impacts 3 4 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 7/6/2022 3 Business Success: Annual Profit > $100K Business Failure: Annual Profit < $100K Wave Park Continually Operational Hotel TOT STVR Sales Tax Wave Park Stops Operating Interruption & Recovery of Revenues Wave Basin Removal & Remediation Costs Hotel Build Out Schedule Rentals Build Out Schedule Hotel Occupancy Rate Rental Occupancy Rate Spenders Per Hotel Room Spenders Per Rental Unit Spenders Per Event Visitor Special Event Schedule Visitors Per Special Event City Services Costs Spending Per Spender Business Type Annual Failure Rate Wave Park Failure Probability Expected Annual Profit (Loss) Large S&P500 10% NA NA All other businesses 13% 78%$130,805 Novel Wave Park 20% 91%-$286 Residential Community 2% 22%$158,614 5 6 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 7/6/2022 4 7 8 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Wave Park Residential Risk level cases: Zero risk $6,000,212 $2,067,196 Business Failure Rate (20% v 2%)-$567,913 $2,042,950 -$286 Business Failure Rate (13% v 1.3%)$514,943 $2,050,959 $130,805 Win Payout Lose Payout Win Probability Lose Probability Wave Park Lottery Ticket #1 $6,000,212 -$567,913 9%91%-$286 esidential Community Lottery Ticket #2 $2,067,196 $2,042,950 78%22%$158,614 Wave Park Lottery Ticket #3 $6,000,212 $514,943 22% 78%$130,805 Simplified Decision Alternative #1 #2 #3 Chance of Winning 1 out of 10 10 out of 10 1 out of 30 Amount you Win $6M $2M $6M Chance of Losing 9 out of 10 none 29 out of 30 Amount you Pay on Losing $600K 0 Amount you Win on Losing $500K Lottery Ticket #1 Lottery Ticket #3 Options Expected Annual Profit The Wave Park almost certainly loses money for La Quinta, and Nobody would willingly choose to buy a lottery ticket that offered the same payout odds NET PROFIT (LOSS) over 13 years (discount rate on future dollars = 5%) Residential Community Profits at 0.1% Special Assessment Levels CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - RICK ROTH - READ BY LOUIS ZAKIN PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT More Problems with the EIR Katrina Chevalier COVE RESIDENT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Significant Issues with IID –Ongoing meetings with Cities on how to deal with IID and electrical issues •How will electricity be provided for Coral Mountain and projects? •That is a significant issue with Coral Mountain Surf Resort because the wave mechanism uses significant amount of energy, the highest of any artificial wave mechanism CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT What does the DEIR say about IID and power •In a will serve letter dated May 26, 2020, IID indicated that it can extend electrical facilities to serve the site. Therefore, with the project’s connection to the IID substation, it is anticipated that IID’s existing and planned electricity capacity and electricity supplies would be sufficient to support the project’s demand. IID has indicated that additional offsite improvements will be required to meet the project’s power demand. The project will be required to install twelve, 6-inch conduits along Avenue 58 to bring additional power to the site and install a transformer bank at IID’s existing substation yard located at Avenue 58 and Monroe Street. •The offsite improvements for the conduit system will take place in the existing right of way, on both sides of Avenue 58, between Andalusia and PGA West, and on Madison Street, west of Andalusia. Avenue 58 is an improved road and classified as a secondary arterial. These improvements would occur along the existing right-of-way and will be installed underground during Phase I of the development. The purpose of the extension is to provide electricity to the project only. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT This referenced Will Serve Letter was expired at the time of the DEIR so the DEIR contained invalid and misleading information •We were told by Ms. Criste that the DEIR did not need to include a Will Serve letter so it is not an issue •But it was in the DEIR •Reviewers were mistaken thinking that the power requirements would be met CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT The Final EIR references the same IID Will Serve letter which says IID was providing a commitment for Phase One only •The project will be required to make offsite improvements for electrical power to the site. The project will be required to install an off-site transformer bank at an existing IID substation located at 81600 Avenue 58 and extend a distribution line along Avenue 58. Conduit systems will also be installed along Avenue 58 as part of the proposed upgrades. Construction of the conduits and line extension would occur in the existing right-of-way. The extension of IID’s infrastructure will provide electricity exclusivity to the proposed project. The project’s connection to the existing IID infrastructure will occur during the first phase of development and will be for exclusive use of the proposed project. In a letter dated May 26, 2020, IID concluded that electrical facilities can be extended to serve the project, under the conditions in the will serve letter.IID was providing a commitment for Phase One only CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT The EIR Referenced Will Serve letter is again the expired May 26, 2020 letter •Mr. Gamlin indicated that a new Will Serve letter was issued in the fall of 2021 and again,it did not need to be referenced in an EIR •However, in the Final EIR issued in February 2022, the same expired Will Serve letter is referenced •The same expired letter for Phase 1 only •Why was the new Will Serve letter not referenced? CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT The Referenced Will Serve letter is again the expired May 26, 2020 letter •In a public records request, the City stated it did not have a copy of the new Will Serve letter •Mr. Gamlin in the June 7, 2022 meeting stated that IID was very impressed with what the project was doing to use and save electricity •How does that relate to a real “new” Will Serve Document? •Is it again Phase 1 only and in this MAJOR IID CRISIS? •You need to actually see a new Will Serve document and what is says about the overall project •How can we believe in the integrity of the EIR if we know there is erroneous information in it? CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT You Cannot Certify the EIR for Coral Mountain •The integrity of the EIR is called into question •We have documented for you numerous discrepancies, not just for IID •How many more or this discrepancies are there? CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Evaporation Lisa Jeffrey Citrus Resident CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT What are the assumptions for Wave Pools •Currently, CVWD Landscape Ordinance defines a “Water Feature” as any water applied to the landscape for non-irrigation, decorative purposes, including fountains, streams, ponds and lakes. The Wave Basin is considered a water feature under CVWD Landscape Ordinance No. 1302.4. •Water features use more water than efficiently irrigated turf grass and are assigned an evapotranspiration adjustment factor of 1.1 for a stationary body of water and 1.2 for a moving body of water for this reason. •The proposed Wave Basin is essentially a lake with moving water and is why the factor of 1.2 is used to estimate evaporation at Coral Mountain Surf Resort in La Quinta. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Hydrologist defined area to calculate •A six foot wave that will be traveling for almost a half mile has more surface area than just the base area of the pool. •For example, if the Wave Basin water surface is 12.5 acres, the actually square footage surface area to be calculated for evaporation is significantly higher and must account for the total 6 foot wave surface. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Other evaporation considerations •If the wave itself does wash over areas, those areas must be considered for evaporation as well. •Our significant wind events must be used in any calculations for evaporation as water will be absorbed into the air at a much higher rate since the air is moving and won’t become saturated. •Pan evaporation numbers that were used as part of the calculations for evaporation by CVWD have not been updated since 2005. That year the Indio area had only 99 days over 100. In 2020, for example, we had over 140 days over 100 and significantly higher temperatures. This would cause significantly more evaporation. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT WADI adventure Surf Park located in a desert •WADI Adventures in the United Arab Emirates is the only other Wave Pool in a desert environment. They had to pipe desalinated water from the coast for 140 miles so they knew exactly how much water was added to the pool. •Their pool was only 2.8 Million gallons and 3 acres. From May to November they added 40,000 gallons and from December to April they added 10,000 gallons. •PLEASE NOTE: They cooled their pool to 84 degrees for the protection of their surfers from the potential of heat stroke and from deadly protozoa. So cooler water evaporates less than the Coral Mountain Wave Basin water which will be in the 90’s in the summer CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Replenishment at WADI due to evaporation •Summer replenishment was 1.5% a day which equates to 270,000 gallons for our Coral Mountain 18 million gallon pool, if our pool was only at 84 degrees. •That is 38 Million gallons for only 140 days, vs. the CVWD calculated 24 Million gallons for a whole year. And this is not including the wind events and higher water temperatures. •And is only 140 days, not a full year. It also does not include the extra surface area of the wave that is exposed to evaporation. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Evaporation in Lemoore •For your information, the Kelly Slater Wave Pool in Lemoore, California, the equivalent pool, size and technology of the Coral Mountain Wave Basin, has said that they lose 250,000 gallons of water on hot days in 2020. •That year they only had 40 days over 100 degrees, with the hottest day 107 degrees. La Quinta had 140 days over 100 degrees with the high temperature of 124 degrees. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT EPA formula Calculation vs. Actual Golf Usage •We did calculations using an EPA formula that takes wind and high temperatures into effect. We only used monthly averages and that came to 740 acre feet or 260 million gallons of evaporation a year versus the 24 million calculated by CVWD •A water bill for a local 18 hole golf course was 165 Million gallons of water consumption in a year. This is lot less than the surf pool. •The golf course was down 15% year over year in the summer, and overall down year over year. Golf courses can conserve. Surf pools cannot conserve. 15% less water means a surf pool cannot operate. They must close. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Wave Pool Evaporation will be significantly higher than calculated by CVWD •A Surfing Wave is not a moving lake •CVWD did not bother to explore more accurate means of calculations to address the Wave Pool •You cannot approve the Coral Mountain Surf Resort because all the water features plus the high number of STVRs will significantly exceed your MAWA in the middle of a historic drought project CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT How Pools Fare in the Summer Brian Levy La Quinta CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT We spoke to the Manager of the Olympic – sized pool at the Palm Springs Aquatic Center 1) How many gallons of water does it take to fill the pool? 600,000 gallons (vs 18 million gallons) 2) What is the physical size of the pool?50 meters by 25 meters, ¾ meters by 4 meters (vs 804 meters by 122 meters by 2 meters) 3) Why do you heat the pool in the winter and to what temperature?We have lap swimmers.We keep our pool around 78 to 82 degrees.(No plans to heat the surfing basin) 4) Why to you cool the pool in the summer and to what temperature? If we did not cool the pool it would be around 100 degrees and that’s too hot for swimmers.(No plans to cool the surfing basin) CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 5) What are the reasons you cool the pool?( Viruses, bacteria and algae? )We have lap swimmers at this pool. They cannot safely swim in high water temperatures. (no cooling at Coral Mountain. Participants at Lemoore comment on the exertion of surfing a long wave. Let’s add the sun beating down on you…) 6) How difficult is it to keep algae from the pool during the summer?Not hard.We brush the entire pool every weekend . (how does one brush a ½ mile by 400 foot pool. Even with chlorine, in extreme heat it is very difficult to combat algae. For every 10 degrees above 84, you need to double chlorine levels. Excessive sun and heat cuts free chlorine levels. And the hydrofoil tracks will accumulate algae, another public health risk). CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 7) Are you following a Public Health Code when you clean out the sand and debris from the pool after excessive wind events? Yes (And yes for the surf pool) 8) How long does it take to clean the pool before you can open it to the public? After a typical wind event it can take 3 man hours to clean the pool from sand and debris. Do you have to open late during the days you must clear out sand and debris?It depends on the damage left the wind. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT 9) Do you close the pool during excessive wind? Yes, if a lifeguard cannot see the bottom of the pool. Or if there is items or debris flying around making for unsafe conditions. (In a typical Garrett Simon answer, when discussing announcements and warning horns from the Tower which is higher up, so sound carrying further since higher, he says they may not have a tower and people might communicate over head phones on the ground. How does one monitor a ½ mile basin from the ground for safe conditions?) 10) How long does it take for the entire pool water to recirculate? 4 hours to filter this pool. (for Coral Mountain the circulation systems will have to run 24 hours a day especially if the basin isn’t used during the day in the summer heat, adding to the ambient noise) CORAL MOUNTAIN IS NOT LEMOORE! CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - LQRRD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Good evening Mayor Evans, Mayor Pro Tem Fitzpatrick, Council Members, Staff. My name is Steve Jeffrey. I live in the Citrus development and I am here to talk to you about noise. Minimizing noise is such a critical component for a healthy environment. You will see that we have provided you a significant amount of reference material to go along with this presentation. There is so much new information that is coming out on noise impacts of wave pools which were never analyzed before. My presentation and the references will make it obvious that the Coral Mountain Surf Park cannot be located at the proposed current location. In your own documentation about Planning for the Future, it is written that the City’s current land use patterns buffer sensitive land uses from high noise levels. However, as the City and Sphere grow in the future, noise impacts will need to be carefully considered. This is particularly true of any area where Mixed Use development is considered – along Highway 111 or in the Village – where there may be less room to buffer residential uses from commercial activities. Careful consideration of each future project will be required to assure that compatibility is maintained. The City’s ongoing efforts to preserve the quality of life for all its residents, present and future, must include the protection of a quiet noise environment. This is worth repeating: The City’s ongoing efforts to preserve the quality of life for all its residents, present and future, must include the protection of a quiet noise environment. I have friends who live with noise and sound reflection issues in the Point Happy area of La Quinta. I have wonderful friends who live adjacent to Coral Mountain and I feel their pain with similar reflective noise issues. I sympathize with their need for quiet enjoyment as a Surf Park Resort will change what was tranquil living they have come to expect to cesspool of noise and more. My friends living near Point Happy know that noise from Festivals can be clearly heard in the neighborhood, traveling far distances to hit the Mountain and bounce off to amplify the sound, similar to an amphitheater - enough to rattle vents, windows and nerves. The same thing happens at Coral Mountain as many of the so-called NIMBY’s have been accused of reporting. I can only imagine if they put the Surf Park just down from St. Francis of Assisi church on Washington, you’d have Point Happy, Laguna de La Paz and Lake La Quinta residents being NIMBY’s too. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT We uncovered ‘a new kinda noise’ that typically is not studied for land-use projects but needs to be if it is known to be present! What is it? It is low frequency noise that is often described as a rumbling, humming or a vibrating sound that can ruin the quiet enjoyment and health of some people. Some might say, don’t worry about it, you can’t hear it, but that is wrong. Per the EPA Victoria Australia Noise Guidelines for Low Frequency Noise - Sensitivity to sound varies greatly between individuals. The person investigating low frequency noise may not hear the sound that someone has reported. However, it is audible by others. This means low frequency sounds only just above the threshold of hearing can be perceived as loud by some people. In humans, the World Health Organization and others have shown that low frequency noise can cause…cardiovascular issues due to increased blood pressure and heart rate, irritability and stress that can increase cortisol levels, sleep disorders and more. In wildlife it can affect foraging, mating and cause herd relocation. So knowing this, we researched Low Frequency Noise and discovered a big association with the words - surf and waves. Even more eye-opening…we found a paper by Shane Chambers from Western Australia that discusses wave and surf components and how they have strong low frequency noise components. He summed it all up by stating until noise from surf waves and surf parks is better understood, control of such noise will be difficult to evaluate and authorities should demonstrate caution when assessing such proposals placed in noise sensitive areas. Shortly after that paper came out, the proposed Tompkins Bay Surf Park was killed by the Western Australia State Authority. Our research continued and we discovered deficiencies and flaws in the Noise Study element of the Coral Mountain EIR. • Low Frequency Noise associated with Surf Waves and parks that was not adequately studied in the EIR thus requiring that the EIR be recirculated as this is New Significant Information. • Poorly designed and described Noise studies with data omissions and result reporting problems and errors that under-report NOISE • Please see the ‘new kinda noise and reference packet prepared for the City Council. • All of that make it more compelling for the City Council not to certify the Coral Mountain EIR. A list of ‘must-haves’ In the next round of Noise Studies is provided. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT We ask for a noise study to be done at night, at Coral Mountain, replicating the sounds of the surf park, the wave, the wave mechanism, the jet skis, the announcements, the crowds, the warning horns. As you know, daytime in the La Quinta noise ordinances goes from 7AM to 10PM. That is absurd, especially in the South East La Quinta area by Coral Mountain where the quiet nights are amazing. This test needs to go on for at least one week. The Coral Mountain Surf Park EIR is flawed due to not only Noise Study errors/problems but more importantly due to not measuring and reporting any Low Frequency Noise and not adopting a dBC noise standard from another agency to use as a guideline which can be done per CEQA. This new significant information requires the City Council to recirculate the EIR per § 15088.5 “Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification.” To all affected Coral Mountain residents, beware, a Surf Park with unstudied low frequency noise may be coming to your backyard and house real soon! CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT A new kinda noise July 5, 2022 I live near Point Happy in La Quinta and hear the Coachella-fest music bouncing off of Point Happy - and just like Coral Mountain, it’s granite with some porosity but still a rough/hard surface that reﬂects noise I have friends who live near Coral Mountain and the proposed Surf Park and ‘echo’ their concerns about noise from the waves, machinery, loudspeakers and music events I am here today to share new signiﬁcant information about noise from the Surf Park and resort setting Page 1 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Here’s what we found out! Surf and Waves have low-frequency sound components Shane Chambers Paper on Surf and Wave Parks…details the physical components of surf park waves and low-frequency noise Western Australia State Authority KILLED the Tompkins Bay Surf Park due to its proximity to residents and more Low frequency Noise (dBC) travels farther, penetrates walls and windows, and reﬂects off surfaces more than ‘ambient’ (dBA) mid-range noise often used in assessing ‘everyday’ noise •So if there is a potential for low-frequency rumbling humming noise from waves, why not measure it correctly using C-weighted ﬁltered dBC measurements? •Low frequency dBC noise is responsible for why we hear the bass tones miles away in Point Happy and at Coral Mountain during Coachella-fest •Echoing or reﬂecting noise can be heard at Coral Mountain…you have many resident reports! Imagine a rumbling low-frequency wave noise coming into your yard or house every 4 minutes for 15 hours a day! Or being subjected to loud announcements and the rushing seadoo noise let alone 4 or more festival/music events all aimed at ruining your ‘quiet enjoyment.’ It will be like Chinese water torture! Coral Mountain residents beware! And worse, Low Frequency Noise could adversely affect the health of residents and local wildlife! Low Frequency Noise is associated with increased cardiovascular risks like increased heart rate and blood pressure, irritation/annoyance and more. Page 2 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT A new kinda noise July 5, 2022 Flawed noise study design and criteria La Quinta uses 65dBA as the peak noise reading based on ‘traffic noise studies’ which ignores unique noises from a recreational wave park •The EIR consultants use that as their ‘guideline’ for evaluation of any noise from a proposed project •The dBA reading represents noise as what we typically hear…but disregards any dBC or low frequency airborne noise, thus any bass-like, rumbling, vibrational noise that is reﬂected off large objects, TRAVELS farther and easily penetrates walls/windows is IGNORED •By not measuring dBC low frequency noise - La Quinta’s N-1 Noise Goal of a ‘Healthful Environment’ is missed •La Quinta made its communities ‘noisier’ by adopting the recommendation in their 2035 plan to change the Municipal-Noise-Code from 60dBA during the day to 65dBA. •Page 17/59 - https://www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/ 33565/636340814687270000 •La Quinta’s newer noisier 65dBA-only standard ignores any bass-like, humming, rumbling low frequency noise that can cause health issues, especially in older citizens (see Health References) •La Quinta cannot say they have met their 2035 noise tenet and goals - Page 17/59 - https:// www.laquintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/33565/636340814687270000 Page 3 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CEQA allows the Lead Agency to use existing standards or applicable standards of other agencies meaning they are not bound to just using dBA! Even Fort Lauderdale, Greensboro NC and others have Noise Ordinances with dBC measures in place https://nonoise.org/lawlib/cities/ordinances/Fort%20Lauderdale,%20Florida.pdf https://www.greensboro-nc.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=20473 Sound level meters can be used to measure and quantify low frequency noise. •Class 1 sound level meters (as deﬁned in the standard IEC 61672-1) will provide more accurate measurements at low frequencies as they are required to meet stricter tolerances and have a wider frequency range. The Piccolo II is not a Class 1 meter - so it cannot be used to adequately measure potential low frequency noise. https://www.merford.com/en/news/a-guide-to-low-frequency-noise The Sound Consultant says they ‘measured everything ‘low medium and high’ but the EIR shows they only reported A-weighted dBA. (Audio/video of April 12 Planning Commission Meeting) •He further stated that any low frequency noise (wasn’t measured using dBC) is now gone due to wave machine re-design, but the EIR says that the primary noise source is from moving waves (Draft EIR 4-11-45). •So wave noise is still there! And known to have low-frequency noise components per the Chambers paper. So measure it! If you don’t you are not… A new kinda noise July 5, 2022 Page 4 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT And…more ﬂawed noise study design and criteria •The EIR states that they used a Point Study - noise from a single, stationary source. Why use that when the wave machine and waves move 100’s of feet as multiple noise sources? A Line study would be more representative - but then the dBA noise would be 3dBA louder at receiver locations in the CadnaA Noise Prediction software simulation of Coral Mountain Surf Park and might exceed the 65dBA limit La Quinta has! •The Noise Study states that Sea Waves cause ground vibration, not measured as VdB at Lemoore, and this would be daily if present…not temporary compared to construction vibration! •Poor EIR Noise report…missing Meter type and locations on a map for the Operational Noise (Lemoore surf park) study. The Existing Noise Study (24 hr Traffic Noise Study) shows locations of each meter, and all measurements are listed in Appendix K. •Only 3 out of 8 Lemoore surf park measurements were reported in the Operational Noise section and in Appendix K. Where are the other readings…was one even higher in dBA? Be transparent! The public has the right to see the sound meter data logs. •Ground attenuation (sound lessening) described and WRONG in the Study…see last reference The Noise Study element of the Coral Mountain EIR is ﬂawed and add to this the NEW discovery of unstudied Low Frequency Noise associated with Surf Waves and Machinery - you have a deﬁcient EIR and it must be recirculated! Page 5 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Here’s what we ask of you! •Implement another agency’s dBC guideline as CEQA allows or create your own •Measure the Low Frequency Noise accurately at the Wave Park in Lemoore with a Class 1 meter, include detailed design layout and data, AND measure VdB as ground vibration from Sea Waves at Lemoore. •Replicate potential noise and measure onsite at Coral Mountain to accurately to assess wave noise, loudspeaker noise and music event noise against the mountain backdrop •Show the CadnaA software Coral Mountain site map and detail if a Large Barrier/Mountain is used in the study - Nearmap aerial imaging is available! •Unlike measuring existing area and traffic noise for 24 hours and getting a CNEL L50 result, per the 1999 WHO Noise Guidance, when there are ‘Distinct’ Noise events, like a wave every 4 minutes, measure using SEL or Lmax and if there is a low-frequency component, like waves or music, then do a C-weighted SEL or Lmax. https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/62698/retrieve and https:// acousticalengineer.com/are-lpeak-and-lmax-different/ So that would apply to - •Loudspeaker Announcements •Music over a period of time •Waves every 4 minutes •Water rescue skidoo racing/revving •Given what has been presented here with poor EIR noise study issues combined with the New Signiﬁcant Negative Information related to unstudied Low Frequency Noise, do not certify the EIR per § 15088.5 “Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certiﬁcation” •Remember La Quinta’s driving noise goal - Page 6 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT City Council members, you must consider what has been presented here as Significant New Information per § 15088.5 “Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification.” Ref 2a.b. This is applicable as the Coral Mountain Resort EIR has not yet been certified. Page 7 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT So…take notice! Coral Mountain residents…unstudied, unmeasured Surf Wave Park NOISE will be coming your way that could cause you adverse health issues if this EIR is certiﬁed Page 16 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References Shane Chambers Surf Wave Noise Paper - https://acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/AAS2018/papers/p142.pdf •This observation implies that the noise would also have directional low frequency components apart from the omnidirectional broadband noise created by bubble cavitation in the spill or breaking processes. These processes result in a pink noise spectrum dominated by low frequencies with harmonic content. •The effect of anthropogenic noise on birds is well documented where levels above 45-50 dBA have been demonstrated to have signiﬁcant negative impacts resulting in a large observed reduction in numbers of affected species (Ware et al. 2015). •Until further evidence of noise generated from such parks is available, control of such noise will be difficult to evaluate, and authorities should demonstrate caution when assessing such proposals placed in noise sensitive areas Tompkins Surf Park Killed…one mentioned in Chambers Paper - https://wavepoolmag.com/urbnsurf-forced-to-ﬁnd-new-location-for-perth-wave-pool/ Hard Granite = Coral Mountain - Draft EIR describes the mountain as granite. (pg 8/127 Draft EIR Appendix G) Granite has some porosity which will absorb some sound but still reﬂect sound, but it is clearly not ‘soft’ like the EIR consultant described it. Low frequency noise reﬂects off large objects better. https://www.teachmeaudio.com/recording/sound-reproduction/wave-behaviour And https://soundprooﬂiving.com/sound-reﬂecting-materials/ Rough walls - Like Coral Mountain! Rough walls tend to diffuse sound, reﬂecting it in a variety of directions. This allows a spectator to perceive sounds from every part of the room, making it seem lively and full. For this reason, auditorium and concert hall designers prefer construction materials that are rough rather than smooth. https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/sound/Lesson-3/Reﬂection,- Refraction,-and-Diffraction 65dBA La Quinta Guideline Outdoor Noise - page 27 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Low Frequency Noise Reﬂection/Travels Farther - page 8/19 https://www.mne.psu.edu/lamancusa/me458/10_osp.pdf Sound Propagation Close to the ground - K. Attenborough 2002 Annual Reviews Fluid Mechanics 34:51-82 Steve Morgan - Low Frequency Noise Identiﬁcation and Mitigation - see article and his references Page 8 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References Noise and health issues - Anthropogenic Noise -CA Dept Fish and Wildlife Cannabis Special Issue 108-119; 2020 Low Frequency Noise and Annoyance - Leventhall, Noise Health, April - June 2004, 6(23):59-72 Steve Morgan - Low Frequency Noise Identiﬁcation and Mitigation - see article and his references Portugal Review of Low Frequency Noise - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/10/15/5205/htm La Quinta N-1 Goal - a healthful noise environment which complements he City's residential and resort character Page 27/53, Noise Study - healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and resort character https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/ 267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK-fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 CEQA allows Lead Agency to adopt standards - just because you don’t have a dBC guideline, then look elsewhere to get one •Section 15064.7 – deﬁnes thresholds of signiﬁcance and encourages Lead Agencies to develop and publish such thresholds; requires that thresholds of signiﬁcance that are to be adopted for general use be developed through a public review process, be supported by substantial evidenced, and be formally adopted; and allows Lead Agencies to consider using thresholds of signiﬁcance adopted by other public agencies or experts, provided those thresholds are supported by substantial evidence. •La Quinta did this for construction vibration standards…used County of Riverside Page 30/253 - https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/ gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK-fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 •Fort Lauderdale and Greensboro have dBC guidelines in their Noise Ordinances •https://nonoise.org/lawlib/cities/ordinances/Fort%20Lauderdale,%20Florida.pdf •https://www.greensboro-nc.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=20473 Page 9 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Sound Consultant - April 12 meeting video - •Stated the wave machine at Lemoore has no low frequency noise with its re-design (so the machine had it all along?) •They measured low/med/high frequencies with the meter, BUT only dBA was reported and speciﬁed in the Draft EIR Noise Study. •He further emphasizes on the video that dBA is the Land Planning standard…but that is not always the case. Wind Farms and Fracking sites are now being evaluated for low frequency noise emissions using C-weighted (dBC) measurements. Coral Mountain Speciﬁc Plan - Appendix K.1 - Noise Study.pdf Most sound meters have the ability to low, med, high noises and give statistical data, but you have to choose A- or C-weighting before the measurement begins which provides 2-different data sets. If they used the Piccolo II for this (we don’t know - not listed in the Operational Noise Section), then they probably only pressed the A-weight button prior to measurement which is why the L50 dBA result is being presented. According to Piccolo tech support, you have to depress the C-weighting dBC button and take a reading which will give statistical, percentile and other information needed to better measure any low frequency noise. La Quinta requires L50 and other percentlles for assessing dBA measurements in their traffic-based existing noise studies, so why not for any dBC measurements moving forward? See Page 38/253 - https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Using just dBA measurements only backﬁred on many Wind Farms and Fracking sites so they now use dBC measurements along with dBA to assess Low Frequency Noise as they know it is PRESENT! We need the same for the Surf Wave Park as it is a huge unknown and as shown here, surf and waves have low frequency components. Additionally, surf waves cause ground vibration as stated in the Vibration Study section…needs to be measured as well in VdB. •MN Windfarm Guidelines use dBC now - https://apps.commerce.state.mn.us/eera/web/doc/13710 •Colorado Fracking dBC used - https://cogcc.state.co.us/documents/reg/Rules/Rules_Prior_to_20210115/800Series.pdf References Page 10 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References CadnaA Noise Prediction Model - Urban Crossroads created a model for assessing noise in a dBA setting. The described highest noise level of 75.7dBA from the Lemoore Surf Park was put into the model to create a 112 Sound Power Level to blast to other receivers in the simulator to deliver computer generated dBA levels at receiver locations R1-10 and P1-10 to compare to the 65dBA La Quinta Noise Limit - none of which exceeded La Quinta’s limit but a few got close! Page 91/253 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Point Study •The Operational Noise Study for the Coral Mountain Surf Park used point/stationary noise source and hard surface for ground level attenuation (noise lessening of -6dbA) in CadnaA noise simulation software. Point study = stationary source like a ‘ﬁxed’ compressor etc. Page 29/253 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 •Why is it that they have a moving wave shuttle machine and a moving wave and not treat them as a set of moving objects consistent with a ‘LINE Study’ often used in railroad and freeway noise studies? Maybe because it lessens the ability for them to SUBTRACT more dBA like what they did with a Point study. •Line studies only allow -3dBA per doubling of distance. That would result in higher readings at the ‘receiver sites’ in the CadnaA Noise Simulator Software meaning they might exceed the 65dBA La Quinta noise standard! •Page 91/253 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0. •And https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/ﬁles/Ontario-Files/Planning/Reports/environmental-reports/section_4.6_- _noise.pdf Page 11 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References - Ground Attenuation/Lessening of Sound To make it clear - Point Source (stationary noise source) was used in the CadnaA software program for Noise Study Design created by Urban Crossroads. Allows for -6dBA lessening of noise for every doubling of distance If a LINE study were used - which requires a completely different layout of sound meters to measure noise at Lemoore, then only -3dBA lessening of noise is allowed. Next Step - what type of ground is the NOISE traveling over? The consultant can select Hard/Reﬂective Surface like pavement/water (note wave pool) which by ISO 9613-2 standards (0) for NO ADDED attenuation or lessening of noise in the CadnaA prediction model The consultant can select Soft/Porous - which is like agricultural ground, or open ﬁelds which means (1) is put into the software to get an added BONUS of -1.5 or more (see below) of noise reduction. The (1) soft porous option is what used in the Coral Mountain CadnaA prediction model DESPITE them describing the location as a ‘hard surface’ which calls for a selection of ‘0’ for no added attenuation. •What is going on here? Bottomline, if it was meant to be a Hard Surface, the data in the Noise Study is bogus and is artiﬁcially lowered because they chose ‘1’ as ground attenuation. •And per the information below, it could be even more ‘attenuation!’ https://www.acoustics.org.nz/sites/www.acoustics.org.nz/ﬁles/journal/pdfs/Hannah_L_NZA2007_c.pdf Page 12 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References - Ground Attenuation/Lessening of Sound No sound attenuation? Why is there attenuation here - factor 1.0 in CadnaA is for soft porous soil/agri and that gets you more attenuation! Shady! And in CadnaA, G= 0 is for sound reﬂecting ground like a hard surface, so why did 1.0 get put into the CadnaA? The Noise Study states the site is a Hard Surface for no additional ground attenuation, but by putting in Ground = 1 for soft surface the consultants get an additional 1.5dBA reduction to the sound across receivers in the CadnaA noise simulator which is deceptive and wrong CadnaA user manual - Appendix K. 1 2 3 4 5 Page 13 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References - Ground Attenuation/Lessening of Sound - cont’d CadnaA Ground Attenuation based on ISO So Ground = 1 is for soft porous ground…but the Urban Crossroads Noise Study says they used 1 for Hard Surfaces which what they speciﬁed…see prior pages. What does this mean? 0 = no additional attenuation as sound bounces off of hard surfaces…but 1, like they used, gave them an additional 1.5 dBA of sound reduction at the sound receiver locations in the CadnaA prediction model. So, if you have a reading, say at P10 of 64.5dBA…which is below the 65dBA La Quinta standard, then it will be 66dBA and over the limit because you need to take away the -1.5dBA reduction as it doesn’t match the hard surface requirement of ‘zero 0 attenuation’ that should have been put into the CadnaA Noise Prediction Model for Coral Mountain! Add the fact they used a Point Source noise study design and measurement scheme, they got a minus 6dBA reduction at receiver locations…but if a LINE study was used, it would have only been a minus 3dBA… So in the P10 case…for illustration if they designed it to be a LINE study, you need to add 3dBA to 66dBA (above) making it much higher and way past the La Quinta 65dBA Standard. Makes one QUESTION the Validity of this Noise Study. The EIR Must be Recirculated!Page 14 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT More References to support the need to Recirculate the EIR Urban Crossroads Vibration Noise Study - 2.9/12642-10. STATES that sea waves are a source of ground vibration. Reported as RMS VdB. This was NOT measured at Lemoore Surf Park. Was not used in CadnaA…only construction vibration simulation was used. This needs to be studied. It is not a ‘short term’ construction vibration, it will last the life of the Surf Park! Page 22/253 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Poor EIR Noise Report - Existing Noise Studies talk about type of meter used…page 33 and locations page 37 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/ gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK-fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Operational Noise Studies - no meter type or study design mentioned - page 88 https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK- fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 Dubious Operational Noise Report - only 3 out of 8 measurements from Lemoore Surf Park are listed, where are the other 5? They are NOT in Appendix K. Only 3 measurements are listed in the Noise Study - pages 88 and 90/253 - https://ﬁles.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267707-4/attachment/ gLYlsap7DjkliZZXT83rK-fbkLxCENFIpE1BrSd0HEM_YLEHrOGz1uJTXjtEGSaODBEAbxc9A2_l3Qxc0 •We, the residents, need to see all the data and sound meter data logs to support measurements taken…just like what was shown in the ‘existing/ traffic’ studies above. Page 15 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT References by Topic Surf and Wave Noise 1a packet of articles Low Frequency Noise 1a, 1d (generators), 2a, 2b. 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 3a Adverse Events - Humans and Wildlife 1b, 1c, 1d, 2a, 2f, 2g, 3b Regulations 3b, 4, 6a-c, MN Windfarm Reg CEQA and more 5a, 5b, 6a-c CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Low Frequency Noise from Breaking Waves William M. Carey & James W. Fitzgerald Chapter 371 Accesses 17 Citations 1 Altmetric Abstract Recent experiments confirm the production of sound by breaking waves at lower frequencies (30 to 500 Hz). Individual breakers produce impact noise as well as a random collection of individual spectral events. Measured ocean ambient noise spectrum levels increase at less than 1 dB per octave toward a broad maximum, which has a weak wind speed dependence between 300 to 500 Hz. Noise intensities (< 500 Hz) are a function of wind speed (U) to the 2n power with 1.3 < n < 2.5 and a value of n=1.5 at 200 Hz. The production of noise in this region has a dipole characteristic. Breaking waves produce an impact, bubble plume, and bubble cloud. The dynamic evolution of these plumes and clouds provides a mechanism for sound production. Since the initial plume and cloud have appreciable void fractions, compressible resonant behavior of these structures as a whole or as multiply connected regions can be represented as compact acoustic monopoles and dipoles. The pressure release surface would result in an effective dipole characteristic. Sufficient energy exists in the initial breaking vorticity and turbulence to explain measured source levels. Since a good radiator of sound is also a scatterer of sound, these plumes and clouds will also scatter sound. Keywords Wind Speed Ambient Noise Wave Breaking Source Level Bubble Size Distribution These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This Search Log in Natural Physical Sources of Underwater Sound pp 277–304 Low Frequency Noise from Breaking Waves | SpringerLink https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-1626-8_22 1 of 12 7/1/22, 10:26 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT SEARCH CITATION SEARCH!MENU SIGN IN/REGISTER " The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America #$%SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE HOME BROWSE INFO FOR AUTHORS COLLECTIONS &SIGN UP FOR ALERTS ’No Access • Submitted: 13 April 1999 • Accepted: 20 April 2001 • Published Online: 03 August 2001 Low-frequency sound generation by an individual open-ocean breaking wave The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 110, 761 (2001); https://doi.org/10.1121 /1.1379729 Steven L. Means and Richard M. Heitmeyer View Affiliations View Contributors • Topics( ◦ Topics ) ▪ Auditory system ▪ Electrodynamics ▪ Radiation patterns ▪ Turbulent flows ▪ Acoustic phenomena ▪ Sound generation Home >The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America >Volume 110, Issue 2 >10.1121/1.1379729 NEXT *+PREV ,-./0 1 2 PDF Low-frequency sound generation by an individual open-ocean breaking...https://asa.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1121/1.1379729 1 of 9 7/1/22, 10:48 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT ABSTRACT Bubble cloud resonances have been proposed as an explanation of the low-frequency acoustic radiation produced by breaking waves. A previous model [H. N. Ogũz, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99 55 , 1895–1912 (1994)] considered excitation of the bubble cloud by a rigid piston at the base of a hemispherical bubble cloud. The present model considers excitation of the cloud by individual point sources within the cloud. A Green’s function is obtained for a point source displaced from the origin of a hemispherical bubble cloud beneath a pressure release surface. The method of images and superposition allow one to obtain the field generated by a distribution of point sources within the bubble cloud. The frequency- dependent radiation pattern for two distributions of point sources within the cloud is obtained. Distributing the point sources within the forward sector of the bubble cloud generates spectral characteristics consistent with measured open- ocean breaking wave spectra. REFERENCES 1.V. O. Knudsen, R. S. Alford, and J. W. Emling, “Underwater ambient noise,” J. Mar. Res. 77 , 410–429 (1948). GG oo oo g g l l e e SS c c hh oo l l a a r r , IISSII 2.G. M. Wenzand M. P. Bradley, “Acoustic ambient noise in the ocean: Spectra and sources,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 33 44 , 1936–1956 (1962). GG oo oo g g l l e e SS c c hh oo l l a a r r , SS cc i i tt aa tt i i oo nn 2 PDF Low-frequency sound generation by an individual open-ocean breaking...https://asa.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1121/1.1379729 2 of 9 7/1/22, 10:48 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Article PDF Available Low Frequency Noise from Breaking Waves October 1990 DOI:10.1007/978-94-011-1626-8_22 Authors: Abstract This document contains an invited paper given at the Conference on Natural Physical Sources of Underwater Sound at the University of Cambridge, July 1990. Recent experiments confirm the production of sound by breaking waves at lower frequencies (30 to 500 Hz). Individual breakers produce impact noise as well as a random collection of individual spectral events. Measured ocean ambient noise spectrum levels increase at less than 1 dB per octave toward a broad maximum, which has a weak wind speed dependence between 300-500 Hz. Noise intensities (< 500 Hz) are a function of wind speed (U) to the 2n power with 1.3 < n < 2.5 and a value of n=1.5 at 200 Hz. The production of noise in this region has a dipole characteristic. Breaking waves produce an impact, bubble plume, and bubble cloud. The dynamic evolution of these plumes and clouds provides a mechanism for sound production. Since the initial plume and cloud have appreciable void fractions, compressible resonant behavior of these structures as a whole or as multiply connected regions can be represented as compact acoustic monopoles and dipoles. (jd) Discover the world's research • 20+ million members • 135+ million publications • 700k+ research projects William M. Carey James W. Fitzgerald David Browning Naval Undersea Warfare Center Citations (43)References (169) Join for free Download full-text PDF Read full-text Download citation Copy link Recruit researchers Join for free Login (PDF) Low Frequency Noise from Breaking Waves https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235144009_Low_Frequency_... 1 of 7 7/1/22, 10:34 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT IEEE.org IEEE Xplore IEEE SA IEEE Spectrum More Sites SUBSCRIBE More Like This Extraction of coastal ocean wave ﬁelds from SAR images IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering Published: 2005 An Empirical Method to Derive Ocean Waves From Second-Order Bragg Scattering: Prospects and Limitations IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering Published: 2006 Show More Cart ! Create Account SUBSCRIBE Journals & Magazines >IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engin... >Volume: 22 Issue: 3 " S.J. Bass ; A.E. Hay All Authors Ambient noise in the natural surf zone: wave-breaking frequencies Publisher: IEEE Cite This !PDF 17 Paper Citations 160 Full Text Views Abstract Authors References Citations Keywords Metrics More Like This Abstract:Ambient noise in the surf zone, in the frequency range 120 Hz to 5 kHz, was recorded using a broad-band hydrophone, located approximately 1 m above bottom and 1-2 m below...View more #Metadata Published in: IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering ( Volume: 22 , Issue: 3, Jul 1997) Abstract: Ambient noise in the surf zone, in the frequency range 120 Hz to 5 kHz, was recorded using a broad-band hydrophone, located approximately 1 m above bottom and 1-2 m below the mean sea surface. The predominant source of this noise is breaking waves. Analysis of simultaneous land-based video observations of the sea surface in the region of the hydrophone, along with wave height data, reveals quantitative correlation between wave-breaking events and the hydrophone signal. In energetic surf, locally breaking waves appear as discrete events in the ambient noise spectra. Distant breaking events do not appear to be detected, as distinct events above the ambient background noise, by the hydrophone. The noise events associated with local breakers are characterized by an asymmetry in the time envelope: low frequencies (less than 500 Hz) are observed leading the breaking crest, followed by a broader range of frequencies peaking in intensity with the passage of the wave crest above the hydrophone, and then decreasing abruptly at all frequencies. Low frequencies are generally not observed trailing the breaking wave. The detection by the hydrophone of breaking waves in the immediate vicinity implies that ambient noise in heavy surf provides a means of studying breaking-wave statistics in the surf zone in situ: in particular, the frequency of occurrence of local breaking. $ ADVANCED SEARCH All % &Browse ’My Settings ’Help ’Institutional Sign In Institutional Sign In ( Sign In Ambient noise in the natural surf zone: wave-breaking frequencies | IE...https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/611130 1 of 2 7/1/22, 10:27 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT IIEEEEEE PPeerrssoonnaall AAccccoouunntt CHANGE USERNAME/PASSWORD PP uu rr cc hh aa ss ee DD ee t t aa i i l l ss PAYMENT OPTIONS VIEW PURCHASED DOCUMENTS PP rr oo ﬁﬁ l l ee I I nn f f oo rr mm aa t t i i oo nn COMMUNICATIONS PREFERENCES PROFESSION AND EDUCATION TECHNICAL INTERESTS NN e e e e dd HH e e l l pp ? ? US & CANADA: +1 800 678 4333 WORLDWIDE: +1 732 981 0060 CONTACT & SUPPORT FF oo l l l l oo ww !" About IEEE Xplore | Contact Us | Help | Accessibility | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | IEEE Ethics Reporting ) | Sitemap | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies A not-for-proﬁt organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the beneﬁt of humanity. © Copyright 2022 IEEE - All rights reserved. Authors * References * Citations * Keywords * Metrics * Page(s): 411 - 424 Date of Publication: July 1997 " #ISSN Information: INSPEC Accession Number: 5674758 DOI: 10.1109/48.611130 Publisher: IEEE IEEE Account »Change Username/Password »Update Address Purchase Details »Payment Options »Order History »View Purchased Documents Proﬁle Information »Communications Preferences »Profession and Education »Technical Interests Need Help? »US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333 »Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060 »Contact & Support A not-for-proﬁt organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the beneﬁt of humanity. © Copyright 2022 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signiﬁes your agreement to the terms and conditions. About IEEE Xplore Contact Us|Help|Accessibility|Terms of Use|Nondiscrimination Policy|Sitemap|Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies| Ambient noise in the natural surf zone: wave-breaking frequencies | IE...https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/611130 2 of 2 7/1/22, 10:27 AM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 2 Publication 1996 June 2021 Authorised and published by EPA Victoria Level 3, 200 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053 1300 372 842 (1300 EPA VIC) epa.vic.gov.au This publication is for general guidance only. You should obtain professional advice if you have any specific concern. EPA Victoria has made every reasonable effort to ensure accuracy at the time of publication. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence. Give feedback about this publication online: epa.vic.gov.au/publication-feedback EPA acknowledges Aboriginal people as the first peoples and Traditional custodians of the land and water on which we live, work and depend. We pay respect to Aboriginal Elders, past and present. As Victoria's environmental regulator, we pay respect to how Country has been protected and cared for by Aboriginal people over many tens of thousands of years. We acknowledge the unique spiritual and cultural significance of land, water and all that is in the environment to Traditional Owners, and recognise their continuing connection to, and aspirations for Country. For languages other than English, please call 131 450. Visit epa.vic.gov.au/language-help for next steps. If you need assistance because of a hearing or speech impairment, please visit relayservice.gov.au CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 3 Contents Glossary ............................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Term ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Definition ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9 When this guideline applies ...................................................................................................................................... 9 What is low frequency noise? ................................................................................................................................... 9 How low frequency noise affects people ......................................................................................................... 10 Characteristics of low frequency noise that can increase its effect ............................................................. 10 How the effect of low frequency noise varies with your location .................................................................... 10 Common sources of low frequency noise ......................................................................................................... 11 Type ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Noise source ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Legislative framework ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Understanding unreasonable noise...................................................................................................................................12 How to reduce low frequency noise levels ....................................................................................................... 12 Hierarchy of controls ..................................................................................................................................................................12 Elimination .................................................................................................................................................................................. 13 Substitution ................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Engineering controls ............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Administrative controls ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 Proposed industry developments and extension of existing premises ......................................... 13 Review the proposed equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Review the proposed installation ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Predicting low frequency noise ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Using extrapolation in low frequency noise calculations ................................................................................ 15 Threshold levels for assessing low frequency noise .................................................................................. 16 Indoor low frequency threshold levels ............................................................................................................................. 16 Outdoor low frequency threshold criterion .................................................................................................................. 16 Assessing low frequency noise from existing premises ........................................................................... 17 Step 1 – Preliminary evaluation ........................................................................................................................................... 19 Step 2 – Field assessment ...................................................................................................................................................... 20 Step 3 – Decide where to measure the noise.............................................................................................................. 20 Step 4 – Measure the noise ................................................................................................................................................... 20 Step 5 – Spectral analysis ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 Step 6 – Consider factor for unreasonable noise ......................................................................................................21 Step 7 – Assess the noise source of low frequency ...................................................................................................21 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 4 Step 8 – Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Step 9 – Assessment report ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Measurement method ................................................................................................................................................ 23 Noise indicator ..............................................................................................................................................................................23 Measurement time ......................................................................................................................................................................23 Measurement duration .............................................................................................................................................................23 Indoor measurement location and procedure .......................................................................................................... 24 Indoor measurement point(s) ......................................................................................................................................... 24 Optional corner measurement ........................................................................................................................................ 25 Room conditions ...................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Indoor measurement procedure .................................................................................................................................... 25 Outdoor measurement location and procedure ...................................................................................................... 26 Outdoor measurement points ........................................................................................................................................ 26 Outdoor measurement procedure ............................................................................................................................... 26 Microphone setup ........................................................................................................................................................................28 Field calibration checks ...........................................................................................................................................................28 Weather conditions ....................................................................................................................................................................28 Extraneous noise ........................................................................................................................................................................ 29 Observation records ................................................................................................................................................................. 29 Audio recordings ......................................................................................................................................................................... 29 Measuring equipment .............................................................................................................................................................. 29 Assessing when using equipment with a limited frequency range ................................................................ 30 Assessment report ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Reporting requirements for noise measurements indoors and outdoors .................................................. 31 References ....................................................................................................................................................................... 33 Victorian Government legislation and publications .............................................................................................. 33 Australian and international standards ....................................................................................................................... 33 Other references ......................................................................................................................................................................... 33 Further reading ............................................................................................................................................................................ 34 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 5 Glossary This glossary defines the terms for the purpose of this guideline. Term Definition Commercial, industrial and trade premises Is defined the Regulations and includes any premises except the following: • residential premises (other than common plant under the control of an owners’ corporation) • a street or road, including every carriageway, footpath, reservation and traffic island on any street or road • a railway track used by rolling stock in connection with the provision of a freight service or passenger service: o while travelling on a railway track or tramway track; or o while entering or exiting a siding, yard, depot or workshop • a railway track used by rolling stock in connection with the provision of a passenger service, while in a siding, yard, depot or workshop and is: o powering up to commence to be used in connection with the provision of a passenger service; or o shutting down after being used in connection with the provision of a passenger service • the premises situated at Lower Esplanade, St Kilda, Luna Park, and being the whole of the land more particularly described in Certificate of Title Volume 1204 Folio 109. Note: The maintenance, cleaning or loading of rolling stock stabled in a siding, yard, depot or workshop are included within the meaning of commercial, industrial and trade premises. Examples Common plant under the control of an owners’ corporation at residential premises includes: • common air conditioning units • car stackers and lift equipment in apartment buildings. These must be assessed as noise from commercial, industrial and trade premises in accordance with the Noise Protocol. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 6 Term Definition C-frequency weighting Frequency weighting, as specified in Australian standard AS IEC 61672.1-2019. that gives more emphasis to low frequency sounds than the A-frequency weighting. Duty holder The owner, occupier or person in control of the commercial, industrial or trade premises. Engineering calculation method Calculation algorithm relying on a combination of acoustic principles and empirical relationships. A suitable engineering calculation method must have been validated against extensive measurement. Also, the set of conditions for which it is fit for purpose must be documented in a verifiable reference, together with the uncertainty of calculation. Excited An element of a structure vibrating, following an impact or a contact with a moving object. Fast (F) time weighting Time weighting characteristic of a sound level meter as specified in Australian Standard AS/NZS IEC 61672.1. Free field conditions Noise measurement conditions where the sound pressure levels recorded by the microphone are not affected by the reflection of sound on surfaces, other than the ground. Frequency Property of sound that measures the rate of repetition of the sound wave, in Hertz (Hz) or cycles per second. Frequency spectrum* Distribution of the energy or the magnitude of a sound across each frequency component. LCeq,T Overall equivalent sound pressure level measured using C - frequency weighting. As an overall level, it combines the sound energy of all frequencies. Leq,T (also known as LZeq,T) The equivalent continuous sound pressure level. It is the value of the linear or Z-weighted sound pressure level of a continuous steady sound that has the same acoustic energy as a given time - varying linear or Z-weighted sound pressure level when determined over the same measurement time interval T. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 7 Term Definition Low frequency noise Noise with low frequency components containing significant acoustic energy within a frequency range defined by one-third octave bands 10 Hz to 160 Hz. Narrow-band spectral analysis A sound analysis approach based on a high resolution in the frequency domain such as Fourier analysis or 1/12th octave band analysis. Octave band A division of the frequency range that can be used to analyst eh frequency spectrum of the measured sound. Noise is measured in octave bands using frequency filters as specified in Australian Standard AS IEC 61260.1:2019 Electroacoustics—Octave band and fractional-octave-band filters. One-third octave band A division of the frequency range that can be used when octave bands don’t provide sufficient resolution. Each octave band comprises three one-third octave bands. Noise is measured in one-third octave bands using frequency filters as specified in Australian Standard AS IEC 61260.1:2019 Electroacoustics—Octave band and fractional-octave-band filters. Percentile level L10,T, L50,T, L90,T Sound pressure level that is exceeded respectively 10%, 50% and 90% of the time during a measurement of duration T. Sensitive receiver That part of the land within the boundary of a parcel of land that is outside the external walls of any: • dwelling (including a residential care facility) or residential building • dormitory, ward, bedroom or living room • classroom or any other room in which learning occurs. Or, in the case of a rural area only, that part of the land within the boundary of: • a tourist establishment • a campground • a caravan park. Spot measurements A survey measurement, typically of short duration, that’s conducted using a handheld sound level meter to get an indication of the sound levels, as they vary within the area surveyed. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 8 Term Definition Structure-borne noise Noise caused by the vibration of the elements of a structure. The source of vibration that results in structure-borne noise is within the building where it’s perceived or within a structure with common elements that transmit vibration. Threshold of hearing The level at which an individual can hear a sound at a given frequency. Unreasonable noise Section 3(1) of the Act defines unreasonable noise as noise that: • is unreasonable having regard to the following: o its volume, intensity or duration o its character o the time, place and other circumstances in which it is emitted o how often it is emitted o any prescribed factors*, or • is prescribed to be unreasonable noise. Z-frequency weighting Means the sound pressure level when no frequency weighting is applied, as specified in Australian standard AS IEC 61672.1-2019. *Frequency spectrum is a prescribed factor in Regulation 120 of the Environment Protection Regulations 2021. It applies to noise from commercial, industrial and trade premises only. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 9 Introduction This guideline is for acoustic consultants and other qualified professionals who assess low frequency noise (10 to 160 Hertz (Hz)). This guideline is also for: • duty holders at commercial, industrial and trade premises to understand and manage low frequency noise emissions • EPA authorised officers to determine whether the emission of low frequency noise from commercial, industrial and trade premises is unreasonable under section 166 of the Environment Protection Act 2017 (the Act). Use this guideline to: • understand the risk of harm from the emission of low frequency noise • assess and address low frequency noise. This guideline should also be used when you’re designing new commercial, industrial and trade premises or installing new equipment or plant at existing premises. When this guideline applies The assessment methods and guidance set out in this guideline only applies to noise emitted from commercial, industrial and trade premises. This guideline does not apply to: • music noise from entertainment venues • noise from residential premises • noise from wind turbines. The New Zealand Standard NZS 6808:2010 Acoustics – Wind farm noise, or its predecessor NZS 6808:1998 Acoustics – The assessment and measurement of sound from wind turbine generators is used to assess wind turbine noise. The assessment of low frequency noise using this guideline is separate from an assessment for compliance with the regulatory noise limits. The regulatory noise limits for commercia l, industrial and trade premises are set out in the: • Environment Protection Regulations 2021 • Noise limit and assessment protocol for the control of noise from commercial, industrial and trade premises and entertainment venues (publication 1826) What is low frequency noise? Low frequency noise is often described as rumbling or dron ing noise. It can be generated by machinery such as pumps, compressors, diesel engines, fans, generators and boilers. Low frequency noise can also be produced by natural sources such as surf in coastal areas and wind. Electrical appliances in homes and buildings, such as refrigerators, can emit low-frequency noise. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 10 Low frequency noise may also occur when an object or machine transmits vibration to the structure of a building, generating ‘structure-borne’ noise. This is when a building’s structural elements, such as walls or floors vibrates and radiates noise following an impact or a contact with a moving object. The noise can be heard inside other rooms to where the object or machine is housed. In this guideline, low frequency noise is defined as noise with significant acoustic energy in one- third octave bands ranging between 10 Hz to 160 Hz. How low frequency noise affects people Low frequency noise can affect people in the same way as other types of noise. This can include sleep disturbance, annoyance, impaired task performance, daytime tiredness, and disturbed daily cortisol pattern due to stress. These effects can cause some people to experience nausea and headaches. The human range of hearing is often described as being from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz (20 kHz). However, low frequency sound at frequencies less than 20 Hz can be audible. Its audibility depends on the sound pressure level measured in decibels (dB) and the hearing sensitivity of whoever can hear it. Sensitivity to sound varies greatly between individuals. The person investigating low frequency noise may not hear the sound that someone has reported. However, it may be audible by others. The perceived loudness of low frequency sounds increases rapidly with increasing noise level (measured in decibels). This means low frequency sounds only just above the threshold of hearing can be perceived as loud by some people (Moorhouse, Waddington and Adams 2011). This doesn’t mean that any audible sound is unreasonable. Characteristics of low frequency noise that can increase its effect Characteristics that can increase the effects of low frequency noise, particularly how disturbing it is, include: • the presence of tones (a sound with energy concentrated at one or two single frequencies, often described as a drone or hum) • fluctuating noise level (rapid increase and decrease in noise level) • frequency modulation (small variations in the frequency of the noise) • rattles or vibration caused by low frequency noise. Low frequency noise with tones can induce greater fatigue and can interfere with task performance more than low frequency noise without tones or with the tones masked by other noise (Leventhall, 2003). How the effect of low frequency noise varies with your location The effect of the low frequency noise also varies with the location of where it’s heard. Low frequency noise is often experienced indoors. Inside a room, low frequency noise levels can vary due to interference caused by sound reflections on the room surfaces. Sound levels can then increase or reduce depending on where a person is positioned. This effect depends on the dimensions of the room and the frequency spectrum of the noise. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 11 Common source s of low frequency noise The presence of any of these sources at a premises does not necessarily mean that a low frequency noise issue will occur. Table 1: Sources of low frequency noise Type Noise source Commercial/industrial/trade • aircraft • blasting • boilers • cooling towers • cooling fans • compressors • diesel engines • electrical installations • extraction fans • heavy machinery • large generators • loading and unloading activities • metal thudding • motors • power stations • pumps • shipping and ships in the harbor • steam releases • shakers • transformers • ventilation plant • vibratory screens Residential • air conditioners • electric appliances • fish tank pumps • heat pumps • refrigerator • spa bath pumps Natural causes • sea, including surf • seismic activity • thunder • wind • wind effects on structures CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Noise guidelines: Assessing low frequency noise 12 Legislative framework Under section 166 of the Act, a person must not emit an unreasonable noise or permit an unreasonable noise to be emitted from any place or premises that is not residential premises. Understanding unreasonable noise Noise is assessed as being unreasonable having regard to the characteristics of the noise and the circumstances in which it is emitted, as defined under unreasonable noise in section 3(1) of the Act. An assessment of unreasonable noise can also include any prescribed factors. Regulation 120 of the Environment Protection Regulations 2021 (the Regulations) makes frequency spectrum a prescribed factor when assessing noise from commercial, industrial and trade premises. The frequency spectrum from 10 Hz to 160 Hz must be used to assess whether the low frequency noise is unreasonable. Other factors which may be considered in an assessment include : • how often the noise occurs • how long the noise continues • its character such as the presence of tones, fluctuations, or pulsing. If an authorised officer reasonably believes that unreasonable noise has been or is being emitted, the officer may issue an improvement or prohibition notice to the duty holder. How to reduce low frequency noise levels If a low frequency sound can be traced to a known source, this increases the potential to take action to reduce the noise. Hierarchy of controls The hierarchy of controls is a step-by-step approach to eliminate or reduce risk, including controls from the highest level of protection, elimination, to the lowest, administrative controls. Figure 1: Hierarchy of controls CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Recirculation of EIR prior to Certification Process Reference 6b CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Reference 6c CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Guidance for Large Wind Energy Conversion System Noise Study Protocol and Report Guidance for Developing and e-Filing the LWECS Noise Study Protocol and Report Submittals to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission DIVISION OF ENERGY RESOURCES Energy Environmental Review and Analysis CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Acknowledgments The Department of Commerce Energy Environmental Review and Analysis staff developed this guidance in coordination with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). We thank Frank Kohlasch and Fawkes Steinwand of the MPCA staff for their efforts. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT Table of Contents Purpose ..........................................................................................................page 4 Monitoring Conditions ...................................................................................page 4 Monitoring Locations .....................................................................................page 5 Monitoring Duration ......................................................................................page 6 Monitoring Wind Speeds ...............................................................................page 6 Instruments ...................................................................................................page 6 Methology .....................................................................................................page 7 Processing the Data .......................................................................................page 8 Results at Varying Wind Speeds ....................................................................page 8 Results at Varying Frequencies ......................................................................page 9 Comparison to Minnesota Noise Standards ..................................................page 9 Map Location of Monitoring Points ...............................................................page 9 Results of Noise Modeling .............................................................................page 9 Conclusions ..................................................................................................page 10 Noise Study Protocol ...................................................................................page 10 Noise Study Report ......................................................................................page 10 E-Filing .........................................................................................................page 11 Appendix A: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Comments ...................page 11 Appendix B: References ...............................................................................page 11 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 Guidance for Developing and e-Filing an LWECS Noise Study Protocol and Report Purpose The purpose of this guidance document is to help wind developers prepare and use a project-specific noise study protocol to guide post-construction noise monitoring, data analysis and reporting according to standard methodologies. Pre-construction modeling recommendations are available in the Department of Commerce's "Application Guidance for Site Permitting of Large Wind Energy Conversion Systems in Minnesota". The purpose of the protocol and the resulting noise study report are to quantify total post-construction sound and assess Large Wind Energy Conversion System (LWECS) contribution at receptors in the project area. The monitoring, analysis, and report will provide information to: • determine total noise levels and LWECS contribution at different frequen-cies and at various distances from the turbines at various wind directions and speeds; • assess probable compliance with Minnesota noise standards; • confirm the validity of the noise modeling conducted prior to permit issuance or prior to construction; and • assess the modeling as a predictor of probable compliance with Minnesota noise standards. This document describes the general parameters for monitoring and reporting post construction noise. It also provides general guidance for developing the noise study protocol document and the report. The actual monitoring, protocol and report for a specific project will likely include more detail and shall address project-specific consider-ations. Noise study protocols and reports are reviewed by Department of Commerce, Energy Environmental Review and analysis (EERA) staff, and staff comments and recommen- dations are provided to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Commission). EERA staff may recommend and the Commission may require changes to a noise study protocol. However, consultation with the EERA staff state permit manager for the project during preparation of the noise study protocol and report is recommend- ed to minimize the need for changes after filing. Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines Scope Noise standards under Minnesota Rule 7030 are total noise standards. Therefore, noise monitoring must address total post-project sound levels in the project area as well as turbine contribution to total sound. This can be accomplished in a couple of ways. First, through an “on/off” monitoring campaign that collects total sound data in the project area with all turbines operating as well as total sound data in the project area without turbines operating, and uses information from these two datasets to deduce turbine contribution. Second, this can be accomplished through a monitoring campaign that collects total sound data in the project area with all turbines operating and also collects total sound data offsite in an area that is similar 4 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 to the project area, but unaffected by turbine sound, comparing the two datasets and evaluating sound data characteristics to assess turbine contribution. Permittees should consult with the EERA staff state permit manager as they determine which approach to use and both the protocol and final report should document the rationale for the method chosen. Specifically, the scope of the monitoring must address: 1.Total Sound: Monitor total noise levels at receptors in the project area during operation, with all project turbines operating. AND 2.LWECS Turbine Contribution to Total Sound: Monitor total noise levels in the absence of LWECS operational noise. Use these noise monitoring results, along with the measure of total noise during tur-bine operation collected in 1 to assess turbine contribution to total sound. Choose one of the following methods: 2a. Monitoring Within the Project, Same Locations, Turbines Off. In conjunction with the monitoring in 1. and using the same methods and the same monitoring locations within the project site, monitor sound with all of this project’s turbines in place but not operating. OR 2b. Monitoring Off-Site, Same Timeframe. Concurrently with the monitoring in 1., conduct off-site monitoring to contribute additional data that supports evaluation of sound that exists in analogous environments in the absence of wind turbines. For comparability, noise monitoring methodology for off-site monitor-ing must be the same as for the monitoring in 1. Monitoring Methodology Monitoring Locations • The protocol must include a clear rationale of the selection of the locations where sound will be monitored. The rationale should identify the features that each location was selected to represent and address its distance to receptors and to nearby turbines or other sources of sound. • Monitoring should be conducted at a minimum of three representative lo- cations within the project area that are in proximity to a receptor, such as a residence. Discuss the monitoring locations with the EERA staff state permit manager as early in the planning process as possible. • One monitoring location must be in proximity to the worst- case receptor pre- dicted by the model. • Do not choose monitoring locations that are in areas that reflect or absorb sound or where there are obstructions to sound. •For off-site monitoring that is done under 2b., the rationale for the selection of off-site monitoring locations should address factors that were considered in determin-ing that the environment at the location(s) is(are) analogous to the locations within the project site. 5 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 Monitoring Timing and Duration • The choice of season and factors that were considered in determining the timing of monitoring should be explained in the protocol. • At each location, monitoring must adequately capture sound levels for hub- height wind speeds above the identified cut-in wind speed for the turbine model. If adequate data is not captured during the initial planned duration for monitoring, the monitoring duration should be extended. • At each location, monitoring must adequately capture sound levels for mi- crophone-height wind speeds below the identified level at which distortion may compromise the data (11 miles per hour) If adequate data is not captured during the initial planned duration for monitoring, the monitoring duration should be extended. • Include in the protocol an explanation of the criteria that will be used to deter-mine if the monitoring timeframe will be extended; for example, if insufficient data of a certain type is not obtained. •For monitoring described in 1. and 2b., collect sound measurements continu- ously over a minimum of a 7 to 14 day period. Data will be evaluated in 1 hour increments (see below). •For monitoring described in 2a., collect sound measurements over a sufficient period of time to ensure that valid comparisons can be made between “off” and “on” measurements. This will likely require 3 or more targeted nights of monitoring to adequately characterize sound levels over the relevant range of hub height windspeeds. •Monitored Data • Sound pressure level, audio recordings, and meteorological data should be collected at each monitoring location. • Sound level data must be collected to provide a quantitative indication of noise at the microphone and allow comparison to numerical standards. Sound level data should include time-synchronized one-third octave band levels at 1- sec- ond intervals to allow characterization of different sound sources as well as identification of short-term activities for potential filtering from the dataset (e.g. mowing, heavy equipment). • Audio recordings should be automatically collected when noise levels were unusually high. Collecting audio during such times makes it possible to go back and listen to anomalous noise events and determine the potential cause(s) of elevated sound levels. • Determine unweighted sound; A-weighted dBA as L10, L50, L90 and Leq on an hourly basis; and C-weighted L10, L50, L90 and Leq on an hourly basis. Each one hour period must begin at the start of the hour in the recorded time of day. In the protocol and final report these terms should be defined as indicated in Figure 1 to avoid confusion. 6 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 • Determine unweighted, A-weighted and C-weighted one-third octave- band analysis for at least as low as 16 (preferably lower), 20, 25, 31.5, 40, 50, 63, 80, 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 315, 400, 500, 630, 800, 1K, 1.25K, 1.6 K, 2K, 2.5K, 3.15 K, 4K, 5 K, 6.3 K, and 8K HZ or higher for a representative wind speed for the location that is in proximity to the worst-case receptor predicted by the model and for the off-site location (if applicable). • Meteorological data should be collected at sound level meter height and should include wind speed, and precipitation. This data should be used to iden- tify periods during which weather conditions (precipitation, high winds on the microphone) distort and invalidate sound level measurements. • Hub-height meteorological data from one or more met towers within the proj- ect area must be obtained for the same time periods and time intervals as the monitoring and should include wind speed and direction. This data should be used to confirm that adequate sound level monitoring data is captured across the relevant range of hub height wind speeds. Monitoring Equipment • Use a sound level meter and a microphone conforming to type 0, 1, 2 or S spec- ifications under ANSI S1.4-1983, a calibrator of known frequency and level, and an oversized microphone wind screen. • Calibration must be done before and after the monitoring period. Sound mea- surements must be taken at least 3 feet above the ground. • An anemometer or similar instrumentation to determine wind speed at micro- phone height must be used. 7 Figure 1. Statistical calculations to quantify noise over one-hour periods CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 Monitoring Analysis and Reporting Data processing • “Spikes” of sporadic noise, such as a motorized vehicle going by, a clap of thunder, or a dog barking, may be eliminated from the data, as long as an explanation is included in the report for the types of sound and percentage of measurements for each that were eliminated, for each location and for each monitoring event. Similarly, data collected during documented periods of precipitation may also be eliminated from the data, as long as an explanation is provided in the report and the percentage of mea-surements that were eliminated, for each location and for each monitoring event, is reported. • For each hour, for all the sound mea-surements obtained during that hour, determine the L10, L50, L90, and Leq as dBA and the L10, L50, L90 and Leq as dBC. Do not include the sound measure-ments that are being eliminated with explanation as allowed above. Data Reporting • Map Location of Monitoring Points. Provide a map showing an aerial photo- graphic layer with the location of turbines, monitoring locations, residences and location of significant local noise sources such as concentrations of agricul- tural activity (for example, a feedlot) or human activity (for example, traffic). The scale of the map should show the distance between monitoring points and the distance of the monitoring point to the nearest turbine. •R esults at Varying Wind Speeds. Report continuous sound measurements at all wind speeds that occur during the monitoring. Present a time series of the total Leq, L90, L50 and L10 for dBA and Leq, L90, L50 and L10 for dBC sound levels for each hour (Figure 2). Chart a similar time series (combine them onto one chart with the sound levels) for corresponding hub-height and microphone height wind speed in miles per hour and precipitation in mm. If the number of parameters presented on the chart is crowded, separate charts may be done for the sound level parameters if preferred but wind speed and precipitation should always be shown along with a measure of sound level. 8 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 •R esults at Varying Frequencies. Present one-third octave-band analysis (at least as low as 16 and preferably lower, 20, 25, 31.5, 40, 50, 63, 80, 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 315, 400, 500, 630, 800, 1K, 1.25K, 1.6 K, 2K, 2.5K, 3.15 K, 4K, 5 K, 6.3 K, and 8K HZ or higher) for each monitoring location. Do not include the sound measurements that were excluded as part of the data processing step described above. • Results for Turbine Contribution. 1. Use monitoring results from 2a to assess turbine on, turbine off, and turbine only sound levels for each monitoring location. Present these results in charts and tables as appropriate. 2. Use monitoring results from 2b to assess sound measurements over the range of frequencies with turbines operating to the sound measurements at the offsite monitor and present estimated turbine only L10 and L50 levels for each monitoring location. Present these results in charts and tables as appro- priate. • Comparison to Minnesota Noise Standards. Compare total and turbine only sound levels to the daytime and nighttime Minnesota noise standards. Include in the report a summary of the L10 and L50 hourly determi-nations for total sound that are above the Minnesota noise standards for each monitoring location and discuss turbine to these total noise levels exceedanc-es. Figure 2. Presentation of Results for all data for monitoring 9 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 2. For modeled sound predicted during the permitting process or prior to construction, include in the report an explanation of the methodology, the assumptions in the chosen model and a narrative description of the choices made for criteria in using the model. 3. Include a narrative conclusion regarding how well the monitored results com- pare to the predicted sound levels for the project and how well the modeling performed as a predictor of probable compliance with the Minnesota noise standards. If the results do not compare favorably, explain. Protocol and Report Development Guidelines Noise Study Protocol Document Protocol Contents The noise study protocol for the monitoring should address following elements, consistent with the monitoring and reporting guidelines in this document: •the purpose of the monitoring; •the monitoring scope; •the monitoring locations and their rationale; •the monitoring timing and duration; •the monitored data •the monitoring the equipment; •data processing; •data reporting; Preparation/Efiling After the Noise Study Protocol has been prepared according to this guidance, com- plete a compliance filing on the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Commission) and Department of Commerce E-Dockets system, by the date specified in the Com- mission LWECS site permit for the project, at this web address: https://www.edock- ets.state.mn.us/EFiling/. Address the cover letter to the Executive Secretary of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for the submittal and for any subsequent revisions. Daniel Wolf, Executive Secretary Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 350 Metro Square Building 121 Seventh Place East Saint Paul, MN 55101 10 •Results of Noise Modeling. 1. Present a map of the modeling that was done previously for the project. Modeling contours must be represented on the map as lines, or transparent shading, at 5 db increments. Show the contours for modeling provided with the permit application, adjusted for the final turbine layout prior to construc- tion. Explain what the contours represent precisely. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT LWECS Guidance for Noise Study Protocol and Report July 2019 Daniel P. Wolf, Executive Secretary Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 350 Metro Square Building 121 Seventh Place East Saint Paul, MN 55101 References 1. American Wind Energy Association and Canadian Wind Energy Association, Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects, An Expert Panel Review, December 2009. 2. Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division, Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines, May 22, 2009. 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, A Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota, 2008. 4. National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Wind Energy & Wind Park Siting and Zoning Best Practices and Guidance for States, January 2012. 5. National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Assessing Sound Emissions from Proposed Wind Farms and Measuring the Performance of Completed Projects, October 2011. 6. Wisconsin Public Service Commission, Measurement Protocol for Sound and Vibration Assessment of Proposed and Existing Wind Electric Generation, adopted May 26, 2010. 11 Noise Study Report Document Report Contents In the noise study report, describe the actual conditions, measurement locations, instrumentation, procedures, methodology, data obtained and results, including charts, and conclusions consistent with the monitoring and reporting guidelines in this document and the noise study protocol approved by the Commission. Document any changes from the approved protocol with an explanation as to the necessity, and any impact the changes may have on interpretation of results. Prepara ion/Efiling E-file the noise study report for the completed monitoring and a cover letter summa- rizing the results and conclusions. Attach the previously e-filed protocol for the mon- itoring to the noise study report. Indicate in the report any approvals of the protocol by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and how and when the approvals were obtained. Address the cover letter to the Executive Secretary of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for the submittal and for any subsequent revisions. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING - JULY 5, 2022 - HAND-OUT - STEVE JEFFREY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 - CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT PROJECT